Politics & Policy

The Kardashian Industry

Celebrity marriage is just good business.

The rapper Kanye West and reality star Kim Kardashian didn’t get married over the weekend in Florence, Italy, so much as complete a celebrity merger. As West reportedly gushed in his remarks on the blessed occasion, evidently overcome with emotion, “The Kardashians are an industry!”

It was like he was marrying General Electric. He was right, of course, and one of the industry’s top products is weddings. There is an impeccable commercial logic to the proposition that it is better to sell two weddings than to sell one.

The last time Kim Kardashian looked stunning in a wedding gown (by Vera Wang), passionately kissed her dapper new hubby (Kris Humphries, a basketball player), and cut into a wedding cake taller than the average person (by Hansen Cakes), she made $15 million.

She released a “wedding fragrance” called, with scant regard for truth in advertising, “Kim Kardashian Love,” and got a two-part special on E! out of the wedding planning and ceremony. Her divorce filing 72 days later wasn’t quite as marketable, but every industry has its core competency, and the Kardashians still haven’t figured out how to make as much out of the ends of marriages as out of their storybook beginnings.

For all that the details of the latest Kardashian wedding differ (gown by Givenchy, Kanye West as dapper new hubby, seven-foot-tall cake by Galateo Ricevimenti), the bottom line is the same: Some reports say they will make more than $20 million off it. If Elizabeth Taylor had had a similar knack for martial monetization, she might have died a billionaire.

The rehearsal dinner was at Versailles, and the wedding ceremony at Forte di Belvedere in Florence — appropriately enough, since the Kardashians are part of a degenerate celebrity aristocracy that lacks for nothing except class, grace, and enduring accomplishment.

Both Versailles, built into one of the largest palaces in the world by Louis XIV, and Forte di Belvedere, a project of the Medicis, have seen their share of gross excess, needless to say. But the multimillion-dollar Kardashian–West union has to rank among the most sensationally vapid events ever to grace those centuries-old structures.

For all its flaws, there was something noble in the old nobility. It set standards and maintained ideals. Selfishness and greed were usually at least filtered through a commitment to something higher. The Kardashians are a testament only to the tacky art of money- and fame-grubbing, without style, wit, or a commitment to the common good. In TV-program terms, it is the difference between Downton Abbey and Kourtney and Khloe Take Miami.

In his wedding speech, Kanye West enthused that the assembled guests included “the most remarkable people of our time,” with the power to “make the world a better place.” Especially if it involves Instagramming photos of themselves.

The celebrity wedding is nothing new, of course. Once upon a time, the famous starlet Marilyn Monroe married the famous ballplayer Joe DiMaggio, and that didn’t last long, either. But the ill-fated Monroe–DiMaggio union had an unmistakable element of tragedy, whereas the Kardashian productions play more like farce.

Kim is the apotheosis of what Jason Roger Moore, one of the creators of the Paris Hilton phenomenon, calls Fame 2.0. It is celebrity with no substance. Kim isn’t an actress, singer, or supermodel. She bootstrapped the temporary notoriety of a sex tape into a reality-show franchise that the family has managed to keep going well beyond its 15 minutes through shrewdness and shamelessness.

The magic of Fame 2.0 is that it builds on itself — until it doesn’t. The undoing of the Kardashian clan probably won’t be public revulsion, or any strategic misstep on their part, given their savvy. It will be the onset of public boredom, with the artifice and manipulation and the whole cast of uninteresting characters. That’s how this particular industry ends.

Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review. He can be reached via e-mail: comments.lowry@nationalreview.com. © 2014 King Features Syndicate

Rich Lowry — Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review. He can be reached via email: comments.lowry@nationalreview.com. 

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
Elections

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More
U.S.

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More