7.10.00
Reality Bites

7.06.00
Clinton's No Jack Kennedy

7.03.00
My Independence Days

6.30.00
Baby, I'm a Rocker

6.28.00
Bush's CORE Beliefs

6.26.00
La Campaign Aux Folles

6.23.00
Teflon Bill & Crazy Glue Al

6.19.00
Father's Day Good Sports: Tiger & Kobe

6.16.00
Everyone Loves a Parade

7/10/00 12:00 p.m.
Reality Bites
Living in a Po-Mo world.

Robert A. George is an editorial page writer
for the New York Post------------------------------------RAGGEDmail@aol.com

In a philosophically deconstructed world, substance matters little; style is everything. In the Clinton world, charges of wrongdoing mean nothing; the cultivated response defines the reality. This is also the foundation for much of post-modern politics. Campaign finance is an "issue" in and of itself. Money may or may not be the root of all evil; it is nonetheless odd that groups and individuals are allowed to advocate issues, but not explicitly request the election or defeat of a politician who might help or hinder the advancement of those issues. In other words, issues can be endorsed, but individuals cannot. Thus, through the control and manipulation of words, reality is controlled and manipulated as well. Bill Clinton is the perfect person to oversee these post-modern times. The president who ponders what the meaning of "is" is prepares to leave office just as television now forces us to consider exactly how "real" is "reality."

The most popular television shows of the summer are so-called "reality-based" programs such as Survivor and Big Brother. In both shows, "real" people are thrown together and required to get along. In Survivor, the setting is a desert island. They have to hunt their own food, make their own containers, etc. The participants vote each week as to who is the most insufferable and gets kicked off. In Big Brother, cameras are omnipresent, watching every food eaten, every word uttered and every trip to the bathroom. The one that survives is rewarded with up to a million dollars.

The conceit in these programs is that viewers get to see how their fellow Americans "really" are, how they manage to survive by their wits and get along with one another. The Survivor party has a "host/overseer" who solemnly performs the eviction ceremony at the end of each episode. There's a full camera and sound crew on the island at all times. There is, truthfully, more danger and drama in the average episode of Gilligan's Island. The tension is about who gets voted off, and how quickly.

Ironically enough, the granddaddy of these shows comes from the network devoted to young people — MTV's The Real World. Nine years ago, the idea was hatched to put several genetically blessed young people into a house, have a camera follow them around, and see what happens. And so, over the years, we've seen the slacker-bicyclist, the AIDS activist, and this year's naive Mormon girl. Like the participants in the new breed of shows, "Worlders" have sometimes been kicked out of the house. (Saturday Night Live did a blistering parody a few years ago which included "Bob Dole" — and his chair — being kicked out of the house).

Again, the conceit the viewer is asked to accept is that this is somehow the "reality" that recent college graduates experience. However, the number one priority for any person right after college is usually finding affordable housing — which has already been taken care of by one's friendly neighborhood cable music station. What else is there really to worry about?

The easy answer is that there is very little else to worry about — which explains why these "reality" shows are popular and why Clinton is acceptable. There is no true sense of danger — or risk — in any of these shows. In the words of San Franciscan Gertrude Stein, speaking of Oakland, "There is no 'there' there."

Without risk or danger, there is no true "life." The so-called "real" participants are, generally speaking, just underpaid actors: Only one person gets the big cash prize. Of course all get the one thing more important in today's society than cash: the fame and notoriety, which, when parlayed correctly, can also mean more money.

Darva Conger, for example, has gone from being the reserved, blushing bride from Who Wants To Marry A Multi-Millionaire to accepting an undisclosed payment to pose in the current Playboy. Survivor and Big Brother, fake "reality" shows as they may be, are huge hits. In fact, more people have already seen at least one of these shows than saw Jim Carrey's The Truman Show, which, it should be remembered, was an implausible "work of fiction" just two years ago. Already, applications are being accepted for the next Survivor cast. By one measure of "reality" — ratings — these shows have passed a certain kind of test. They are quote-good-unquote and worthy of continued existence. Clearly, Ramesh Ponnuru was more right than he realized when he concluded a recent NR article: "Like Winston Smith, we weep and realize that we love Big Brother."

This is life in the po-mo world. Back in the alternate reality that used to be called the "real" world, these developments have a decidedly discomforting aspect. When one recognizes the implicit deception inherent in these programs, does not their popularity suggest that the American people might accept being deceived and implicitly lied to, so long as they remain happily entertained?

Hmmm...In the movie Gladiator, Commodus realizes that keeping the public entertained with primitive battles in the Colosseum keeps the citizenry docile and would ease an acceptance of his planned (yet never-actualized) complete dissolution of the Roman Senate. We should all be thankful that that could never happen in the United States.

Right?

Columns / Current Issue / Goldberg File / Nota Bene
Washington Bulletin / Subscribe / Ad Info / Home