Some of you may know that since 2004 I have worked part time at the Maryland Renaissance Festival on cast. Last year I took a hiatus and this year, I'm partially there as a vendor. Suffice to say, over the past 10 years I have become well-versed in my "history of Europe" in general.
This past weekend, I overheard a mother pointing out a member of the nobility moving past them. The little girl was in awe of the court gown, jewels, etc. Her mother quickly explained to her that "in the old days" people used to set others above them based on birth and that those people weren't actually any better than the other people. She spoke of revolutions and the birth of America as examples of that change in "European" attitudes. According to her, the world no longer works that way. The days of kings, nobility, and classes of people are behind us, in her words.
I was torn between the thought that either she was extremely naive or she was flat out lying to her child for some reason. Here in America, we most certainly do have our noblesse - just a lot less oblige. I said nothing to these strangers enjoying their day, but the conversation stuck with me.
First, a little recap on history from my point of view (let's see if any of those classes stuck). There have ALWAYS been those set above others, whether by birth or earned fame. From the most ancient of times the hierarchy of precedence is clear in every known culture. True, for many centuries, it was based on birthright - being born into the right family at the right time, etc. or "luck in life" - marrying well or using an earned / stolen fortune to buy a better place for your future generations, thus returning to the birthright formula. Religious hierachies have definitely shaken up existing powers over time depending on who had the stronger army backing the prevailing dogma. From ancient dynasties to current day, certain inevitable cycles have continued. At its most basic, the colonial American birth and growth is clearly built upon the same sort of precedence.
Even in this moden time family wealth, notoriety, place in politics or education and invention have created numerous strata that the citizens of this nation attempt to flow between. Across the nation, by region the evidence of preexisting social patterns still exists today. They are deemed tradition or regional behaviors, but taken as a whole - they are actually a continuation of learned behavior that has gone on for centuries. The difference being that in America we have added arenas that were previously thought little of and raised them above others in a seemingly illogical way.
For instance, the American gentry, in my opinion, consists of the following:
Persons of power: Government Officials, Judges, Religious Leaders, and Industry Leaders
Persons of education: Leading Educators, Doctors, Inventors, and Explorers
Persons of notoriety: Entertainers, Sports Leaders and Team Members, Media Leads, and the Infamous
Of these three groups, persons of notoriety and power are the most prominent and historically revered. Life is structured around them. Rules and acceptable mores are devolved from their lives, choices and ideas. People revel in the minute details of their lives. From what they eat, wear and drive to their thoughts on ideology, faith, and cultural mores, people tend to give these persons the credit of knowing what is right. Too often, a person puts aside their own common sense or gut instinct to follow one or many of these "nobles".
The invention of communication devices has only amplified our ability to keep abreast of what these gentry are doing and spread the word more quickly. It has taken those who are infamous for negative behavior and elevated them to being equal or surpassing those actively contributing to society. Sadly, in the same vein, lack of amplification has decreased the visible value of those people who dedicate their lives to saving, bettering, or educating others.
There was a time when actors and persons who played such terrible games as "foot ball" or soccer, were thought to be the lowest of the low. The idea of giving a performer or herald (media lead) more credence than an educator or physician would have been laughable. Even leaders of nations held educators and inventors in the highest of esteem. In this day and age, we seem to feel that it's reasonable to pay a person more to play a game that could injur them for life to entertain us than we pay the people who lead our nation, save our lives, or educate our next generation. It is more important to honor and award those who entertain us than to have a public accolade for those who work diligently to care for the poor, educate the young, or serve the elderly or infirm.
While certainly returning to the days when an accident of birth determined your future, be it by status, race or religion, is not desirable at all - surely we're gone too far in the other direction?
So, to the mother admonishing her child's admiration, I would warn you not to ignore the signs that exist even today of the same exact attitudes. They are as dangerous now as they were then. It's ok to admire the prominent, wealthy and beautiful - so long as you can honor the lesser known people who are a much more vital part of your dailt existence.
I, as an entertainer, enjoy being paid and applauded, but I have no illusions that even the best portrayed role and the most moving script could ever outrank the skilled hands of a nurse or EMT holding someones life in their hands. I admire those teachers who take on the most challenging students and stick with the low pay and difficult parents to try and better future generations. I am humbled by those who use their lives as sacrifice to help those born into lesser means and opportunity. Value does not equal money, but money should reflect more accurately true value.
As was said in the movie "A Bug's Life" (Irony much?!) by Hopper: You let one ant stand up to us, then they all might stand up! Those puny little ants outnumber us a hundred to one and if they ever figure that out there goes our way of life! It's not about food, it's about keeping those ants in line. That's why we're going back! Does anybody else wanna stay?
We're figured out that we can be anything we want to in life if we work for it, but for some reason we started reaching for the glitter and not the substance. The work part is no longer attractive. The glory of achieving something isn't nearly as much fun as having stuff to show for it. There's some sort of social trick in that. In reaching for the flash, we're often lost in the fire. So few actually achieve that glamour status, but so many could achieve more with their lives if they stopped aiming for something that in the end only has substance when it was achieved through a lifetime of actually producing value.
It's the haves and the have nots - but it's not about money or fame. It's about common sense and realizing that the privelege of the modern world is not just that you can achieve anything you set your mind and work to accomplish. More importantly, it's understanding that you have a duty to expect more of those you choose to revere and have the right to promote those who exemplify the opportunities so many generations have fought to give us.
I'm not saying don't enjoy your movie or your favorite sports team - I do. I'm just saying, if you cheer for them perhaps we should cheer louder for those who may deserve it more? Recognize when we are perpetuating a cycle that in the end will not leave us with astounding leaders, smarter futures, and advances in our society. I expect my opinion on this won't be popular, but if it gets people to start thinking and reprioritizing, then I'm happy.
No comments:
Post a Comment