Kim Kardashian Instagram followers count is over 317
million (317.621.966) (Instagram, 2022). This reflection is not solely about Kim Kardashian but about
celebrities as a whole and what they represent in the society that we live in
today. This reflection will unpack and deconstruct the processes behind
celebrity culture as a new and expanding phenomenon focusing particularly on
Foucault’s (1995) use of Jeremy
Bentham’s concept of the ‘panopticon’ and surveillance; Ritzer’s (2005)
ideas around consumerism; and ideas that suggest that we are now in a
knowledge/information society as Phillips, et. al (2017) addressed. In using
these theories, this reflection will
explore the negative implications that the celebrity culture has for wider
society, and in particular young girls.
Foucault’s (1995) ideas around
surveillance and the panopticon are of significant importance here. He uses the
panopticon to describe a social arrangement in the 1800s that meant, “the few
saw the many” (Mathiesen, 1997, p. 219). Jeremy Bentham then
used this idea in the context of a prison in relation to how the guards
surveyed the prisoners. Mathiesen (1997) however, introduces
the idea of the ‘synopticon’ as a development of the panopticon. The synopticon
is now a key characteristic of modern society and is more significant in
relation to celebrity culture as it suggests that increasing advancements in
technology and the mass media – something that Foucault (1995) did not take into
account in his book – have now enabled the “many to see the few” (Mathiesen,
1997, p. 219).
He points particularly to VIPs and the stars, the topic of this reflection.
This development of the panopticon to the synopticon has caused a shift in
normal surveillance.
Although individuals seldom realise that they are
subjects of surveillance, Lyon (Lyon, 1994, p. 4) highlights that “ordinary people now
find themselves ‘under surveillance’ in the routines of everyday life”.
Individuals are not being directly ‘spied’ on, however large corporations,
national banks, the government and surveillance cameras are constantly gathering
data on us when we complete the simplest of tasks. This idea of celebrity
culture therefore juxtaposes with regular surveillance. The weak and powerless
are now able to survey the powerful – celebrities are only described as
powerful here in accordance with their money and fame. It is tempting to call
individuals who follow celebrities powerless, but are they really weak and
powerless? The individuals referred to, are consumers within the celebrity
culture and consequently have a spending power and market share of celebrity’s
fame. Would the construct of celebrities exist without the investment by
‘followers’? The answer: probably not. Celebrities are simply individuals that
are “known for being well known” (Boorstin, 2012, p. 60), which is not a new
phenomenon. What is new however, is the way in which individuals are able to
gain access and be close to celebrities on a daily basis through increasing
ICTs; we become infatuated with the lives of those who have money, wear nice
clothes and are ‘beautiful’ and this infatuation consequently reinforces their
fame.
It is the information/knowledge society that enables
these close connections and visibility of celebrities by ordinary, non‐ famous, individuals. The knowledge society can be
defined in a variety of ways but Webster (2002, p. 9) offers a distinctive
definition that “there is not more information today, but rather that the
character of information is such as to have transformed how we live”. As well
as this he sees that television, PCs, and online information have reconstituted
the social world (Webster, 2002). As a result of this
technology, we can quite easily become obsessed with celebrities as we can
surveil their everyday movements from the palm of our hands through the use of
mobile devices. Webster (2002, p. 14) also notes “wealth
production comes, from not physical effort, but from ideas knowledge, skills,
talent and creativity’”. However, what some Z‐list
celebrities promote to impressionable youths is a quick way to become famous,
as some of these Z‐list celebrities become
famous whilst being talentless.
A prime example of this is looking towards reality TV
shows such as Made in Chelsea, The Only Way is Essex, Keeping
up with the Kardashians, and Geordie Shore. These types of shows
represent pseudo‐events. Pseudo‐ events are events or activities that take place purely
for the purpose of media publicity (Boorstin, 2012). These shows are
extremely staged and are a representation of superficial accomplishments whilst
also sending out an unacceptable and unrealistic portrayal of morals and social
norms for the audience watching. A knowledge society is a society that is
nurtured by its diversity and its capacities (UNESCO, 2005, p. 17). It means one
whereby individuals acquire knowledge and apply it to enhance economic and
social development. Nevertheless, this is not something that these types of
shows offer to those who are watching. It could therefore be said that we are
not living in an information/knowledge society as our sources of value have
changed; we are valuing particular famous celebrities that do not provide us
with a source of intellectual knowledge and power that we can use to better
ourselves or society.
Weber (1930) spoke of increasing
rationality in modern society that meant individuals lost their sense of spirituality
and traditional religious beliefs declined. What Ritzer (2005) now argues is that
Western societies are distinctly defined by consumption. His ideas see a change
from religion to consumerism whereby he refers to shopping centres as
‘cathedrals’. It could be argued that in an age of consumerism, we are given
something different to believe in, something that brings us together with a new
type of social glue as young people are willing to “pay up to fit in” (Klein, 2000). This is in no way
to suggest that Christianity for example has been replaced by actions of
consumption, but that religion and consumerism share certain worshipping
characteristics. As Klein (2000, p. 93) puts it: we are
living in a “corporate climate obsessed with finding the secret recipe for
cool”. This is where worshipping characteristics are similar. Young girls
become obsessed with certain celebrities as a kind of ‘God’ and therefore the
visibility of celebrities and their popularity, leads to young girls
desperately trying to emulate the looks and styles of celebrities, as this will
make them ‘cool’.
However, what is of great concern is the fact that
celebrities come in different shapes and sizes, different hair colours, eye
colours… This is what causes negative implications for young girls aspiring to
be their ‘God‐like’ celebrity. What exactly will make them cool? How
exactly should they look? This age of consumerism and celebrity culture has a
relationship with modern capitalism in the sense that young girls are aiming
for unachievable goals. These unachievable goals are an example of hyperreality
where the “concept of reality remains an order of illusion” (Gane, 2000, p. 34). There are so many
false ideas surrounding beauty and beautiful body images that are permeating
celebrities. Wolf (2013, p. 210) highlights the toxic
pressures that are put onto young girls and strongly argues, “that the surprise
is not how many do have eating disorders, but that any at all do not.” This
shows the severity of the impact that celebrity culture can have on young
girls. In corroboration with this, Setiawan (2022) argues that
celebrity culture celebrates thin bodies, and ridicules larger ones. It is a
sad state of affairs when society does not give girls the message that “their
bodies are valuable simply because they are inside them” (Wolf, 2013, p. 197) as opposed to valuing the outside appearance
of someone. Kim Kardashian for example, has a tiny waist and a large bum but is
praised for her appearance. Typically, someone with a large bum would be
ridiculed for his or her weight. What individuals do not realise is that
celebrities have millions of pounds and are able to visit the gym for multiple
hours everyday, have someone style their hair and contour their face yet they
are still seen as a natural beauty.
Again, this represents the hyperreality of everyday life.
The theory of ‘false needs’ can be applied here as Marcuse (Marcuse, 1964) argued that capitalism creates false
needs that are consequently fulfilled through consumerism. For example, girls
are told that having defined cheek bones is beautiful, as almost every female
celebrity contours their make up. Girls then go out to buy a contouring kit to
emulate celebrities and satisfy their needs. This is all just a process of individuals
surveying celebrities, and emulating what they do through consumerism.
As it was stated at the beginning of this reflection ,
this was not just about Kim Kardashian, but rather celebrity culture as a
whole. What the title ‘Kares to Kim Kardashian’ does represent however, is the
way in which celebrities make themselves visible and more appealing to
consumers. By changing the C to a K, it gives individuals the ability to mimic
the celebrity more and be on a personal level with them. Individuals are more
likely to buy into products if they have emotional identifications with the
celebrity that they ‘worship’ (Ritzer, 2005). What this
reflection has hopefully echoed is how increasing technologies have given us
more sources of knowledge, but that these technologies and knowledge are not
always used in a positive way. Thus, we have celebrity’s lives right at our
doorstep, yet this can create unhealthy obsessions with young girls disliking
their appearances and therefore lead them to increasingly consume more in order
to become the people they admire.
References
Boorstin,
D. J. (2012). The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America. New York
City: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of
the Prison. New York City: Vintage Books.
Gane, M. (2000). Jean Baudrillard: In Radical Uncertainty.
London: Pluto Press.
Instagram. (2022, Juni 11). Instagram @KimKardashian.
Dipetik Juni 22, 2022, dari Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kimkardashian/
Klein, N. (2000). No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand
Bullies. New York City: Alfred A. Knopf.
Lyon, D. (1994). The Electronic Eye: The Rise of
Surveillance Society. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Marcuse, H. (1964). One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the
Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. Boston: Beacon.
Mathiesen, T. (1997, May 1). The Viewer Society: Michel
Foucault's `Panopticon' Revisited. Theoretical Criminology, 1(2),
215-234.
Phillips, F., Yu, C.-Y., Hameed, T., & Akhdary, M. A.
(2017, December). The knowledge society's origins and current trajectory. International
Journal of Innovation Studies, 1(3), 175-191.
Ritzer, G. (2005). Enchanting a Disenchanted World:
Revolutionizing the Means of Consumption (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Pine
Forge Press.
Setiawan, A. R. (2022, March 29). Misogini di K-Pop.
Dipetik June 11, 2022, dari Alobatnic:
http://alobatnic.blogspot.com/2022/03/misogini-di-k-pop.html
UNESCO. (2005). Towards Knowledge Societies: UNESCO World
Report. Condé-sur-Noireau: Imprimerie Corlet.
Weber, M. (1930). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of
Capitalism. London: Unwin Hyman.
Webster, F. (2002). Theories of the Information Society.
London: Routledge.
Wolf, N. (2013). The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty are
Used Against Women. New York City: Random House.
