Goody vs Richardson

Toby Young has a post here:

http://www.tobyyoung.co.uk/blog_257/does_jade_deserve_a_bigger_sendoff_than_natasha.html

that in a rather long winded way explores the concept of celebrity and how it has been reflected in the deaths of Jade Goody and Natasha Richardson.

He quotes extensively from Professor Mark Rowlands who has written a book called Fame. It seems that the Professor is not very impressed with the modern day phenomenon of being famous when not having actually achieved anything. Toby argues that this existed in much the same way in the past and cites examples, he also suggests that maybe Britney Spears should be celebrated as a person more than Beethoven since she is obviously not as naturally gifted in music than Ludwig and she has achieved her status through hard graft whereas Ludwig was just lucky to be born with a natural flare for music.

What I think they are both missing is an understanding of why there is such a need for celebrities.

People are more interested in the Goody story than the Richardson story even though Richardson is a more accomplished celebrity. Many people blame the media for the way they have portrayed the Goody story, however, the reason they behave the way they do is because it sells copy, which means many people want this stuff. If you check the google searches over the last week Goody beats Richardson.

Why?

I think the basis for celebrity is the voyeurism of the public and Goody understood that. She took advantage of many peoples deep need to explore other peoples lives, her celebrity was based solely on her celebrity and not any achievement and she exposed the whole system as a way for the public to indulge in their own fantasies.