Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Rise of the Aristo-Brats

By Vanessa Richmond, The Tyee. Posted June 17, 2008.


Fame and fortune is flowing faster and faster to kids of the famous fortunate.
Advertisement

So You Think You Can Dance, the underdog but odds-on-favourite in the race to be America's Next Top Reality Show, gets going for real tonight. If you've been watching for the last few weeks, you've seen hundreds of ugly ducklings and a few swans audition, all with stardust in their eyes.

Nigel Lythgoe, a co-producer and judge, told them last week, in fact, that if they didn't want to be stars, they should get off the stage. They all stayed put. Because that's what it and other star-making TV shows are about -- achieving the American Dream through the most meritocratic contest around.

But though I have been glued to the box since its first season, I have seen no previous winners of the show anywhere after. And this is true of the other shows; I have only seen anything of three winners of American Idol -- ones who have actually gone on to have songs on the charts. And only Adrianne Curry, the first season winner of America's Next Top Model, has had even moderate career success (if Playboy counts as such).

Interesting, then, that despite a few dips in Idol's ratings last season, these are among the most popular shows on TV, when some, like Radar Magazine, have just declared the meritocracy officially dead.

They shall inherit the glory

Forget talent and hard work as the route to fame and power. In "Attack of the Aristo-Brats!," Radar welcomes readers to the new age of nepotism saying, "children of the rich and famous are taking over the world," and "an aristocratic chill is gripping the nation as never before."

Cruz Beckham's impromptu breakdance at a Spice Girls' concert at Madison Garden got more screams from the 15,000 audience members and more media chatter about future career success than the winners of So You Think You Can Dance enjoy. Miley Cyrus is already a more famous singer (and whatever else she is), at 15, than any of the Idol winners can hope to be. And as far as modeling goes, Riley Keough (Elvis' granddaughter), Frances Cobain Bean, and Keith Richards' daughters Theodora and Alexandra, among others, are appearing in shows and glossy ads for designers like Dior. "Indeed, with each new fashion season, another genetically advantaged aristo-brat elbows some anonymous Lithuanian bombshell out of the way."

Given the obsession with corporate branding, the phenomenon of second-generation celebrity should come as no surprise, Radar argues. "Increasingly, children are just brand extensions in person form -- human sequels, easier to green-light than untested projects." When Maddox Jolie-Pitt decides to make his first film, studios will likely outbid each other for it (very similar to what local film students experience, I hear) because regardless of whether it's good or terrible, audience members will pay to find out. His is a household name and story, and many want to find out the next chapter in the tale.

Look no further than the current A-list crop in Hollywood to see where last name gets you. Some are talented, some not, but all start on the top floor: there's Gwynneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Anniston, Kate Hudson, Tory Spelling, Nicole Ritchie, Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian to name a few of the royal daughters.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: celebrity

Tyee contributing editor Vanessa Richmond writes the Schlock and Awe column about popular culture and the media.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The Majority of the Spoiled Persons Mentioned Have Zero Education At a Place of Higher Learning...
Posted by: Turiye on Jun 17, 2008 1:17 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...so what have we learned about the intellect and ability to communicate in a civilized dialogue among others that are informed. They are of Rodeo, Fifth Ave and Montaigne in Paris. They are able to take out their Black Amex and buy Gucci, Chanel, Prada, Louis Vuitton, Fendi, Gucci, and whatever article of clothing of the nanosecond is, my their parents must be so proud...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Famous for being famous
Posted by: goeswithness on Jun 17, 2008 3:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And I come here to get away from it!

Although I confess there are times I almost wish I was famous for my famousness enough that every time I screwed up my life I could get my own reality show, exploit myself, and dig myself out of my troubles with all that money!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Famous for being famous Posted by: Romantic Violence
» RE: Famous for being famous Posted by: goeswithness
Famous people of the world, unite!
Posted by: cunning rabbit on Jun 17, 2008 4:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A Chinese friend told me: There is an organization in China called "The Association for Famous People." No idea what it's for--maybe to promote the fame of the already famous? Time to have a branch in the U.S., too, if there isn't one already.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is the pattern.
Posted by: Cybershaman on Jun 17, 2008 5:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those who inherit wealth or fame have no appreciation for it. It came so easily that it has no real value for them, thus they flaunt it arrogantly and behave like it is owed to them. They become so insulated from the common people they eventually start treating them with open contempt.
Eventually their behavior gets to be so boorish that the general population rises up and kills them. Such is the way of this world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The nepotism you can See
Posted by: Purple Girl on Jun 17, 2008 5:21 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Giving your kids everything is not just an epidemic in Hollywood, it is also in Industry- regardless of talent and ability.Hollywood is the least of our concerns- when industry (and of course their bitch Gov't) begin handing down the crowns to their kids.
But this all stems from an Idology that all the Blood sweat and tears our ancestors put forth was all for the Boomer generation- Fait accompli- so no further effort is required from those who were given the silver spoon.Granted it began a long time ago with the Rockefellars, Morgans et al. but the Entitlement with out responsiblity has Trickled down en masse during the Boomers Reign of Power.They in fact have failed to accept the reality that they are only where they are from the efforts of their parents and all those who labor beneath them now.
Look a little deeper this 'anointed' attitude is far more pervasive than just in LA LA Land- and has far more devastating effect to our Nation and the World.Apparently we are all to believe the sacrifics of the past were for the Benefit of this Boomer Elite class and their descendants- Monarchies with out Crowns and Septors- Yet!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The nepotism you can See Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: The nepotism you can See Posted by: marykmusic
This entitlement crap has translated into an antire generation- and will be the death of us all
Posted by: Farasien on Jun 17, 2008 6:01 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you look at a large swath of gen X (of which I'm disgusted to say I'm a member) and most of gen Y, they all have a similar attitude as the rich brats talked about in this article. The younger generations have been given almost everything by their formerly hippie parents and have worked, on their own, without mommy and daddy's constant coddling- for NOTHING. People have asked me why I have so little hope for the future, and my response is simple... When an entire generation is entitled and has the same attitude as second-generation rich, there will be nobody there to pick up the pieces once they drop it, which given the current situation, has already been locked in to happen in a decade or so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You joined the COAST GUARD? Posted by: blogbooks
» RE: You joined the COAST GUARD? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: You joined the COAST GUARD? Posted by: Outsidetheboxlookingin
» RE: You joined the COAST GUARD? Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: Relative Depravation Posted by: DesertStone
Quantum Entertainment
Posted by: loxias on Jun 17, 2008 6:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what, they have money and the kind of people who care about celebrities pay attention to them. They also have to get old and look at their selves in the mirror as they throw money at hiding their age as youth disappears, popping Xanax to forget those impromptu drunken rages, hair shavings, public displays of immorality, wasted money, and shallow performances. At least half of them will turn into raging addicts and burn through a lot of the family fortune, if history is any lesson. Is any of this something to be jealous of? To emulate? If you don't know the satisfaction of earning a career, earning a higher education, working to start a band, writing music... well it's not too late. Turn off the TV. These people exist in the bubble of attention YOU give them. Pay attention to your life, and they disappear like wisps.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Quantum Entertainment Posted by: Knot_Rich
» This reminds me of a great MOVE song Posted by: Aposterioriperception
Rotting from the head down
Posted by: particle on Jun 17, 2008 7:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
George Bush. Biggest aristo-brat of them all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is why I don't watch tv.
Posted by: davesilvan on Jun 17, 2008 7:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It rots the mind. When I do happen to flip it on, I look for 'cops' so I can see them bust innocent civvies (minorities) over drug possession. And I think Harry Anslinger must be proud. In his grave.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WE MUST AVERT OUR EYES
Posted by: lulugeez on Jun 17, 2008 8:58 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When you come upon a crash on the highway, do you get out of your car and try to get close? Do you enjoy scenes of destruction, the carnage of crushed souls or the stiff contortions of bodies moving with the lone imperative to inject sexy into every single step? Ok, then, watch it all on TV. But for entertainment, I think we can do better.

Why bemoan the rigging of a process that denies outsiders the opportunity to join a constellation that projects all the scintillation of a couple hundred LEDs.

I can certainly see better dancers on Salsa Night at the Firefly Club http://fireflyclub.com/home.htm where the dancers don't have to exagerate the hip/belly movement. They move with grace and a flowing rhythm. It can't be seen, but there's a sensual synchronicity, a flow of that good old je ne sais quoi. These dancers are not begging for our approval. They are enjoying the dance.

The experience of real dance does not enhance the performances of the contentant dancers. As the weeks go on, they grind and bump like gumbies, they forsake sensuality for a technique best suited to a gladitorial contest among wannabe robotic sex toys.

Megemedia's remakes of Stairway to the Stars is just too cynical to watch. The sarcasm of the judges, the crushed hopes of the contestants--I must avert my eyes. I'm having more fun sitting on our front porch with friends and neighbors, singing along with my daughters' ukuleles. I can't endure the sado-masicist assults on humanity offered as entertainment.

(By the way, if you live in a neighborhood whithout front porches--sorry. Go to your city council and demand one and while you're at it, detach the garage from the house or convert it to a greenhouse or sunroom if it can't get moved to the back.)

And if you can't sleep at night maybe a walk around your neighborhood with your dog would be more helpful than a seance with the blue light. You'd be surprised. You might find people smoking, playing cards, talking or even singing softly along with an instrument that has no ambition to drown the human voice--just the quiet contentment of strumming along.

Of all the enclosures that have walled us away from our own humanity and harnessed our talents to enterprise, this latest, that cuts us off from our own abilities to entertain ourselves, is perhaps the most damaging. We all know how to sing and dance, act, draw, paint. This is a human birthright that we need to exercise. This is not something we can outsource to an industry and still hope to live a fully human life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:love your post Posted by: wittler youth
» RE: love your post Posted by: lulugeez
Remember when it mattered if you were from a "good family?"
Posted by: Jasonix on Jun 17, 2008 9:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before the Baby Boomer-era, when it became easy to make it on your own merits thanks to generous social programs and America's post-World War 2 wealth, what kind of family you were from dictated virtually everything about your life. Marriages were restricted to members of the same social class. People inherited their parents professions.

This was only an informal reality in America - in much of the rest of the world, it was formally mandated by law and religion, and trying to buck the social structure could get one exiled, imprisoned, or killed.

Much of the elite has always operated on a family-basis. Their networks of families were basically conspiracies against the rest of the human race. Now that they're won so much, they don't feel the need to disguise that fact any longer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Don't be ridiculous Posted by: gellero1
Miley Cyrus
Posted by: BlueTigress on Jun 17, 2008 9:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not sure how she got picked for "Hannah Montana" (it could be the famous father helped) but the majority of her fame comes from the mighty Disney marketing machine.

If she were just Billy Ray Cyrus's plain untalented daughter, we would not be hearing boo about her unless she got in trouble.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: you miss the obvious Posted by: DesertStone
It's Not Just Hollywood
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jun 17, 2008 10:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A young Repugnican-Lite son of a Congressman in trouble because of continuing scandals decided to run for his dad's seat at age 25. Green out of Law School with no legislative experience. Hardly spent any time living in the district he wants to represent having grown up in the DC area. He wins the seat, beating an experienced State Senator with a long track record of superior service.

Later he runs for and almost wins a Senate seat. When he loses this 'Tennessee' Congressman moves to NYC and cashes in. His name- Harold Ford, Jr
.
Evan Bayh, Dubya Bush. Jeb Bush, any number of Kennedys, Hillary Clinton...

Third World crap.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nepotism Posted by: Aposterioriperception
» RE: Nepotism Posted by: desidid
I Have To Agree With Your Friend...
Posted by: Wacre on Jun 17, 2008 10:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in that there was/is never truly a meritocracy in this country, primarily because idea was doomed from the start.

You cannot have a meritocracy if you don't allow the participation of all your citizens in the activities that help to make the fabric of your nation strong, which has been the case (to varying degrees) for much of America's history. In that respect the United States is no different than any other nation.

The difference comes when you have a belief system predicated on things like individualism, which is also, at heart, a myth and the idea of meritocracy, not the reality.

What American Idol and shows of that ilk do is to reveal and make obvious tendencies that were already there.

As things currently stand, the word 'meritocracy' exists–for the most part–as a term used to deny the right the right of individuals to compete on an even playing field, as in: "You're________________ (insert adjective of choice here), where you are clearly because you lack the ability to be otherwise."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No Meritocracy???? Posted by: gellero1
» RE: No Meritocracy???? Posted by: Wacre
Pleeeeeeeze forgive me....but I love Beckham!
Posted by: Midwesterners on Jun 17, 2008 12:27 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey, I detest just about everything there is to do with the MSM--and everything it has "spawned" or that revolves around it. That includes our obsession with materialism and beauty--which have tragically become our "standards" for judging a person's "worth" these days!!!

But paleeeeeze, I have been in love with David Beckham since he was a 17-year-old lad bursting on the scene on the other side of the Pond!! And even though I am a true Old Fart from America, my husband and two sons turned me into a rabid soccer convert two decades ago. (We'd probably all be hooligans if we lived on the other side of the Atlantic.) So paleeeze-- and despite the quite anorexic "Mrs. Beckham"--I think there are some exceptions to your otherwise excellent analysis of our infatuation with celebrities and their children. Personally, I love reading or seeing anything there is to do with Beckham. And like many others all over the globe, I too get an enormous kick over how much his children look and sound just like him--even if they are AristoBrats!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
enough already...
Posted by: astralman on Jun 17, 2008 12:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
life isn't fair. these people are all looking out for #1, if you were in their position of power would you have the maturity to make the ethically correct decision? if you want to level the playing field then fine, but don't get upset that they use money and connections (family or otherwise) to advance their own careers or their children's. most of you do the same now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: enough already... Posted by: Aposterioriperception
it has not always been this way
Posted by: deang on Jun 17, 2008 2:56 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your friend's claim that it's always been this way, that everyone has always been obsessed with people already rich and famous above people with less fame but more talent, is wrong. The focus on celebrity, especially celebrity via wealth alone, became overwhelming in the 80s, part of the rightward shift of that decade that persists to this day. It is a major mistake, frequently made by today's ahistorical US young, to dismissively claim that the way it is now is the way it's always been, that people have always been craven, superficial, and shallow. As recently as the 70s, people with talent but no celebrity background regularly made names for themselves, names for themselves that lasted. And since it hasn't always been this way, it doesn't have to remain this way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who do we blame...
Posted by: pomes on Jun 17, 2008 4:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The morons who ride on their parents coattails?

Or the morons who worship the morons who ride on their parents cottails?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama yo Mama
Posted by: gellero1 on Jun 17, 2008 10:13 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Obama has chosen Caroline Kennedy to be on/leading his Vice Pres Selection Committee.

Is she not a celebrity/brat rich kid ( or ex kid) ??? What qualifications does she have to be there, if not her rich/celebrity status. I don't see the umbrage about that in the posters here.

The Hoi Polloi luv celebutants......and so do you, as long as it's a Kennedy....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The last time I went to a movie...
Posted by: manderson on Jun 18, 2008 1:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...was in 1996. I quit watching TV around 2000, after tapering off for about 8 years previous. I could give a rat's ass about reality shows (never seen ONE), and most of the the so-called musical "talent" that is raved about these days is nothing of the sort---all this is part of the Am-er-eek-an 'Cocoon" media. Be an anarchist---ignore the crap the system tries to throw at you. If you are spending your time analyzing it, you're paying FAR too much attention to the damn crap...real people don't behave like that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

real people do watch t.v.
Posted by: wittler youth on Jun 18, 2008 10:27 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the jobless the too broke to see a movie crowd..the young cause there parents? pulural?? cant afford a baby sitter?crap!..what planet you on?..you really want us to turn off our t.v.s? and be clueless about what to talk about the next day???end of conversation for you; so go walk your dog in your meth/ crack infested neborhood!..git to know the thugs next door?..man your killing me..no better yet..t.v. lets me see my neibores on 'COPS' ....when am i gonna git a life; NEVER. and you sir are in the same boat as I.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: real people do watch t.v. Posted by: carcinoid112
Stop contributing to the madness!
Posted by: keystone999 on Jun 19, 2008 11:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nepotism is always around, but American's feed into this crazy obsession with the rich and famous and their offspring. We could end it by NOT buying fan magazines, watching them on TV or purchasing any of their "lines" of overpriced handbags or jewelry or T-shirts. If the US were a meritocracy, we would be a nation run by scholars and public service PhDs, not by wealthy idiots with undeserved G-d complexes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MERITOCRATIC? YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING
Posted by: bernadette on Jun 20, 2008 4:08 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read your sentence about meritocracy and I actually couldn't finish reaing the article after that. Really? Meritocratic, do you know what the word means? You can't and then consider these bland, vacuous concerts have anything to do with that wordd! I couldn't finish the article after that, I felt it had to be pointless;

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

celebrity does not mean talent
Posted by: whealeydj on Jun 21, 2008 5:53 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone remember Leif Garrett? someone who I was envious of in my adolescence whose subsequent life not so happy. Some children of pretty rich and famous get some tabloid coverage; I certainly remember way too much coverage of Princess Grace's children and John Kennedy's children so Brangelina and Tomkate offspring will get too much attention. Founding of People magazine increased the tabloidization of trivial. Only celebrities who use their fame to promote causes are worth a damn, so I could care less about Angelina's children but her devotion to international human rights makes her a better person thn Anniston imo.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]