Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: The “Nice Guy” defense Previous entry: When the mask slips

Who are you calling a narcissist?

Music

Man, I cannot recommend Nitsuh Abebe's defense of "narcissism" in pop music in New York Magazine enough.  Just drop what you're doing and read the whole thing.  Abebe takes on the recent trend of claiming that the preening in pop music is somehow more evidence that the younger generation are a bunch of ego monsters, a claim that has gotten really out of control in and of itself.  Sure, I saw a shift towards helicopter parenting when I was working at a university myself, but I remain skeptical of the claim that this has made young people giant narcissists.  When I think of a "narcissist", I think of Dick Cheney, who shot someone in the face and made him apologize for getting in the way of the gun.  Or Rupert Murdoch and anyone who thought that getting involved in the News of the World scandal was a good idea.  Or Arnold Schwarzenegger knocking up a woman who worked for him and acting like it's no thing.  That's the casual disregard for others and overwhelming self-interest that comes to mind when I think of narcissism.  Simply wanting to be seen and want to feel beautiful and worthy?  Whatever.  I wish more people felt safe doing that. 

And Abebe masterfully gets right to the heart of the problem with this hand-wringing about "narcissism".  It's such a coincidence, is it not, that narcissism in pop music has become a major concern as the voices of women and people of color dominate the charts?  But as Abebe explains, there's a countertheory to the "kids are so full of themselves" narrative.  Perhaps preening is popular because it speaks to an audience of people who feel marginalized in their real lives and therefore are ready to hear a pop singer tell themselves that, contrary to popular opinion, they're actually pretty great?

Today’s pop world is female, African-American, and Latino, dance-pop and hip-hop and R&B. The audiences it’s usually associated with are female, African-American, Latin, gay, and young. And the music running through the charts is filled with qualities that look a lot like the aspirations and survival strategies of people who’ve felt marginalized—people for whom ego and self-worth can be existential issues, not just matters of etiquette.

This isn’t some arcane sociological observation; empowerment is a selling point of the music itself. It’s almost redundant to explain how hip-hop has schooled the nation in some of the tools and postures of an under­class, from persona-building to competitive braggadocio as a form of entertainment. (Even something as basic as the way rappers used to move their arms is now part of the physical vocabulary of most Americans under 40.) (2) Today’s dance music still carries traces of gay club culture—spaces where people could perform gender and sexuality in ways they couldn’t elsewhere. Just about every young woman on the charts is navigating a complicated matrix of beauty standards, sexual roles, power dynamics, and good-girl/bad-girl dichotomies. Questions of self and self-esteem are unavoidable.

Which isn't, like he said, to say that it's all perfect.  A lot of songs have questionable values, like putting too much emphasis on intra-female competition instead of actual self-esteem, or coming from Chris Brown's House of Self-Pity. Some songs, like much of Beyonce's work, manage to use the sounds and even language of ass-kicking, but if you listen to them more closely, are presenting female dependence on men as natural, inevitable, and even desirable.  But I think his read on the relationship between audience and artist is right.  It's not that there's a sea of narcissists eating this shit up.  Pop music is, like he says, mostly club music these days.  The general theme and tone of it is to point itself at people who often feel disempowered and telling them that tonight they're going to put on their game face and their high heels, they're going to look fabulous and have fun, and no one can tell them they don't deserve every minute of it.  

In other words, it's disco. 

I was really surprised that Abebe, who I'm coming around to thinking is probably the smartest guy out there writing about music and whose writing I just eat right up, didn't even mention disco.  Maybe it was a space issue, but seriously, not mentioning disco strikes me as strange, because if you're going to talk about a backlash against club music that heavily features the voices of the traditionally marginalized and has a message of self-esteem and empowerment, well, "Disco sucks" is what comes to mind for me.  

Abebe describing the recent surge in pop songs that are causing the "narcissism" hand-wringing:

Katy Perry’s “Firework” reassures you that “you don’t have to feel like a waste of space” and exhorts you to “show them what you’re worth.” Pink commands: “Don’t you ever ever feel like you’re less than fuckin’ perfect.” Lady Gaga, Warholian per usual: “We are all born superstars.” Ke$ha: “We’re superstars / We are who we are.”

Some of these songs are trash, some aren't, but it really made me think about a long line of hits from the 70s that were about preening and showing off and demonstrating bravado and kicking ass: "I Will Survive", "Staying Alive", "Ring My Bell", "I'm Every Woman", "Good Times" and even the Village People.  It's also worth noting, as this post does, that there's a trend of "wash that man right out of my hair" club songs as well lately, and again, in disco this was a major theme. The two themes are intertwined, and while they're hardly awash in political correctness, I think there's something to really think about here in terms of how the audience relates to this music. 

Of course, trying to convey all this is a real struggle.  I was doing some feminist event thingie and mentioned, off-handedly, that Beyonce's music felt empowering for a lot of women.  This caused an immediate pushback, because lyrically, Beyonce's is what they like to call in the biz "problematic".  But there's a real problem with reading songs straightforwardly from their lyrics.  You can be fully cognizant of the problems of Beyonce's lyrics but still feel the beat and the power of her voice propelling you onto the dance floor.  It straightens your spine and lifts your chin. I think of Chaka Khan singing "I'm Every Woman".  On the page, the lyrics read a little, uh, man-pandering.  But when she sings it, it's like more like world-conquering.  I think the lyrics that read as "narcissistic" on the page have to be understood in context, too.  Hyperbole is the language of pop music. 

I realize that last time I talked about the race/sexuality/gender issues behind "disco sucks", some people defensively whined that this had nothing to do with it, and it was just a reaction to how ubiquituous the music was.   And no one is denying that ubiquity feeds the resentment.  Abebe acknowledges that, and so do I.  But a lot of different kinds of music become ubiquituous to the point of annoyance.  But lots of music manages to become ubiquituous without people worrying that an entire generation of people are ruined forever by it.  What kinds of music get this treatment can tell us a lot about our social prejudices.  

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 04:18 PM • (47) Comments

Simply wanting to be seen and want to feel beautiful and worthy?  Whatever.  I wish more people felt safe doing that.

Absofuckinglutely.

Comment #1: Triplanetary  on  07/12  at  05:24 PM

The one thing more irritating than “I’m not rude, I’m just being real” has to be the fucking tone argument that divorces propriety from common decency.

Comment #2: scrumby  on  07/12  at  05:43 PM

Although I understand people being Glee’d out, it strikes me as slightly odd to entirely omit it in a blog post about young people using pop music to shore up their self-esteem and self-worth, especially when they are marginalized. That is, after all, the fundamental premise of the show. Just thought I’d proffer that as more evidence for your (and Abebe’s) primary thesis.

Also, what Triplanetary ^ said.

Comment #3: RachelA  on  07/12  at  05:50 PM

Written in 1960:

Kids!
I don’t know what’s wrong with these kids today!
Kids! 
Who can understand anything they say?
Kids!
They a disobedient, disrespectful oafs!
Noisy, crazy, dirty, lazy, loafers!
While we’re on the subject:
Kids!
You can talk and talk till your face is blue!
Kids!
But they still just do what they want to do!
Why can’t they be like we were,
Perfect in every way?
What’s the matter with kids today?
Kids!
I’ve tried to raise him the best I could
Kids! Kids!
Laughing, singing, dancing, grinning, morons!
And while we’re on the subject!
Kids! They are just impossible to control!
Kids! With their awful clothes and their rock an’ roll!
Why can’t they dance like we did
What’s wrong with Sammy Kaye?
What’s the matter with kids today?

Comment #4: Iam138  on  07/12  at  05:56 PM

Rachel, I suppose I’ve completely blocked that show out.  Anyway, it runs a little outside the very narrow territory I’m discussing, which is club music.  Also, “Glee” hasn’t, as far as I’ve seen, drawn nearly the vitriol about narcissism.

Comment #5: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/12  at  06:01 PM

But there’s a real problem with reading songs straightforwardly from their lyrics.  You can be fully cognizant of the problems of Beyonce’s lyrics but still feel the beat and the power of her voice propelling you onto the dance floor.

Lyrical Dissonance, as TVTropes puts it. Many many examples are listed, but, as you noted, the lyrics themselves aren’t (except in specific cases, such as pure rap) necessarily the most important thing about how the song makes you feel. Sure, Good Riddance (I Hope You had the Time of Your Life) is a breakup song and the last thing you’d probably want to play at a wedding, but it feels like it’s a nice song about commitment, so that’s what counts, and yeah, Goodbye Earl is about murdering someone, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t cheerful too.

Comment #6: KeithM  on  07/12  at  06:12 PM

But a lot of different kinds of music become ubiquituous to the point of annoyance.  But lots of music manages to become ubiquituous without people worrying that an entire generation of people are ruined forever by it.  What kinds of music get this treatment can tell us a lot about our social prejudices.

You mean like Nickelhack and all of the million other rock bands that use the same style? (yes, Nickelhack was intentional, not a typo.)  The whole crisis about narcissistic teenagers listening to pop is basically no different than how (mostly) old, white people assumed that listening to rap would make all young people gang-bangers.

Comment #7: progrocker  on  07/12  at  06:38 PM

“In other words, it’s disco.”

So true. Almost all my favorite dance/disco tunes are empowering songs. And they’re great!

Comment #8: Mark  on  07/12  at  07:39 PM

There’s more to narcissism than this, if you read a book like “The Narcissism Epidemic.” It’s not just “being full of yourself” or thinking you’re hot. It’s more, for instance, wanting to be admired and fawned over rather than connecting with anyone emotionally, a lack of empathy, and viewing life as a zero-sum game—if someone else is happy or successful, they must be taking some of your happiness or success. (Narcissists tend to be extremely envious, but full-of-themselves types aren’t.) Most narcissists are obsessed with creating a false self for other people to admire and aggrandize, and they usually crash and burn from all the energy they put into their carefully crafted stage persona. It’s hard to explain, you’d have to read one of the books about it.

When I think of a celebrity narcissist, the first person that comes to mind is Lady Gaga, not any of the pop singers who call themselves “hot.” She’s already showing some warning signs of someone who’ll end up in rehab soon.

Comment #9: Ashley Herzog  on  07/12  at  08:51 PM

“The general theme and tone of it is to point itself at people who often feel disempowered and telling them that tonight they’re going to put on their game face and their high heels, they’re going to look fabulous and have fun, and no one can tell them they don’t deserve every minute of it.”

That’s not narcissism. I think people who say these songs are “narcissistic” don’t really know what the term means. Rapping about how hot you are and how all eyes are on you isn’t narcissistic, but Eminem rapping about how he’s going to kill bitches to show them who’s boss definitely is.

Comment #10: Ashley Herzog  on  07/12  at  09:00 PM

What on earth makes you think Lady Gaga is going to end up in rehab soon?

Lady Gaga constructs her larger-than-life persona and creates bizarre images, especially throgh her fashion and her music videos, as performance art pieces. You don’t have to like her work but to pretend the NYU Art School grad isn’t deliberately creating art is way unfair. Unless you think all artists who interrogate identity are narcissists?

Comment #11: reverie  on  07/12  at  09:11 PM

progrocker:

I prefer “Nickelstank Park”.

Comment #12: BrianX  on  07/12  at  09:18 PM

Reverie:

I don’t think a lot of people can fathom someone who’s so publicly surrealist not having any vices stronger than pot. Besides, go read or watch an interview with her. She’s got her head in the game.

Comment #13: BrianX  on  07/12  at  09:21 PM

Because people close to her keep telling interviewers that she’s not just creating art and/or acting, she’s completely lost touch with who she is and lives only as “Lady Gaga.” Having a stage persona or a character you play is one thing—a lot of people can separate the two—but becoming the character and losing any sense of your true self is not healthy. It’s putting on an act 24/7.

Of course, it could be sour grapes or gossip on the part of the people making these claims about her, although I did just read about how she barely eats and has been hospitalized several times. If you read any of the books on narcissism, she seems like a textbook case of tearing down the real self and creating a false self, if the claims about her are true.

Comment #14: Ashley Herzog  on  07/12  at  09:55 PM

And did you know that Mick Jagger wore tight pants? And Elvis swiveled his hips!

It all started with that Negro music, I tells ya.

Comment #15: Bitter Scribe  on  07/12  at  10:35 PM

Collapsing the distinction between the “false” (constructed) persona and the “true” (natural) self is the point of the art.

For a more lengthy analysis see this article or really any of the articles on that blog. A quote:

When Lady Gaga hit the pop culture-scape with “Just Dance” in 2008, her performance was accompanied by the slogan “Pop Music Will Never Be Low Brow,” which was appropriately projected in her video-screen glasses, the first of many props that would celebrate the power of the image in culture. Since then, Lady Gaga has remained steadfast in her declaration that her performance – her lies – are her truths to be taken seriously, even while blatantly marketing, branding, and “selling” herself out. The power of performance was explored in depth throughout the era of her debut album The Fame, during which Gaga literalized and embodied the spectacle, perpetually drew attention to the power of the image in our everyday and humdrum lives, and exhibited how fictions, lies, performances, costumes, and poses make up our existence, personalities, and identities. In short, during The Fame era, Lady Gaga became synonymous with performative and creative identity – an identity that rejects essentialism, determinism, and foundationalism.

These notions are echoed in “Manifesto of Little Monsters,” a video shown during an interlude of the Monster Ball; in this video, Lady Gaga discusses “the lie” as the “real truth.” “It is in the theory of perception that we have established our bond, or the lie I should say, for which we kill,” she says. “We are nothing without our image, without our projection, without the spiritual hologram of who we perceive ourselves to be, or rather to become, in the future.” During these two years of The Fame and its dark twin The Fame Monster, Lady Gaga repeatedly illustrated – in her daily outrageous outfits, in her music videos, in her stage performances – how life is art. There was no difference between the street and the stage: Gaga never took off her costumes, in fact, they were not costumes in the classical sense just as “Lady Gaga,” she repeatedly told us, is not a persona or a stage name – there is no fixed identity behind the mask. If art is synonymous with life, then life itself is but a performance – and we are all a part of the (freak) show. This was the idea of The Fame/Monster.

Of course, the article then goes on to argue that she has moved on from The Fame project and is now working with more embodied, physical notions of identity. It’s not that she’s abandoned the idea that identity is constructed, but she’s deepening that idea by trying to bridge that self-creation or lie with the material reality of identity as inscribed on the body.

Regardless of exactly how she conceptualizes the notion of identity, the important point is that her art work is the result of critical engagement with big ideas, not just shallow narcissism. She’s problematizing and complicating the binary between the “real” and the “false” self. The tearing down of the boundary between the two, the confusion of the person and the persona, is intentional. She’s not just doing performance art, she is performance art. I think that’s an intentional, artistic vision, not a personality disorder.

 

Comment #16: reverie  on  07/12  at  10:43 PM

Collapsing the distinction between the “false” (constructed) persona and the “true” (natural) self is the point of the art.

For a more lengthy analysis see this article or really any of the articles on that blog. A quote:

When Lady Gaga hit the pop culture-scape with “Just Dance” in 2008, her performance was accompanied by the slogan “Pop Music Will Never Be Low Brow,” which was appropriately projected in her video-screen glasses, the first of many props that would celebrate the power of the image in culture. Since then, Lady Gaga has remained steadfast in her declaration that her performance – her lies – are her truths to be taken seriously, even while blatantly marketing, branding, and “selling” herself out. The power of performance was explored in depth throughout the era of her debut album The Fame, during which Gaga literalized and embodied the spectacle, perpetually drew attention to the power of the image in our everyday and humdrum lives, and exhibited how fictions, lies, performances, costumes, and poses make up our existence, personalities, and identities. In short, during The Fame era, Lady Gaga became synonymous with performative and creative identity – an identity that rejects essentialism, determinism, and foundationalism.

These notions are echoed in “Manifesto of Little Monsters,” a video shown during an interlude of the Monster Ball; in this video, Lady Gaga discusses “the lie” as the “real truth.” “It is in the theory of perception that we have established our bond, or the lie I should say, for which we kill,” she says. “We are nothing without our image, without our projection, without the spiritual hologram of who we perceive ourselves to be, or rather to become, in the future.” During these two years of The Fame and its dark twin The Fame Monster, Lady Gaga repeatedly illustrated – in her daily outrageous outfits, in her music videos, in her stage performances – how life is art. There was no difference between the street and the stage: Gaga never took off her costumes, in fact, they were not costumes in the classical sense just as “Lady Gaga,” she repeatedly told us, is not a persona or a stage name – there is no fixed identity behind the mask. If art is synonymous with life, then life itself is but a performance – and we are all a part of the (freak) show. This was the idea of The Fame/Monster.

Of course, the article then goes on to argue that she has moved on from The Fame project and is now working with more embodied, physical notions of identity. It’s not that she’s abandoned the idea that identity is constructed, but she’s deepening that idea by trying to bridge that self-creation or lie with the material reality of identity as inscribed on the body.

Regardless of exactly how she conceptualizes the notion of identity, the important point is that her art work is the result of critical engagement with big ideas, not just shallow narcissism. She’s problematizing and complicating the binary between the “real” and the “false” self. The tearing down of the boundary between the two, the confusion of the person and the persona, is intentional. She’s not just doing performance art, she is performance art. I think that’s an intentional, artistic vision, not a personality disorder.

To bring this back closer to the topic, I don’t think it’s accidental that this bisexual artist who advocates for queer youth strays into postmodern queer theory with her art.

(Sorry if this is a double post, I think my last comment got eaten)

Comment #17: reverie  on  07/12  at  10:46 PM

You’re right, I guess the people that complain about this sort of thing wish there was a middle ground between “you’re trash” and “you’re perfect”.

Maybe it’s my calling to write songs about how “you’re okay” or “as humans go, you’re doing pretty great”. But nobody would dance to that shit raspberry

Comment #18: Treefinger  on  07/12  at  11:10 PM

@Treefinger

Something like:

You’re thoroughly adequate,
though far from perfect,
not anything to get excited about
but some people probably like you okay,
sha-na-na, sha-na-na,
sha-na-na, sha-na-na
?

Comment #19: mr_subjunctive  on  07/12  at  11:51 PM

Because people close to her keep telling interviewers that she’s not just creating art and/or acting, she’s completely lost touch with who she is and lives only as “Lady Gaga.”

“Lady Gaga” seems a much closer approximation of a human being than, for example, “Michael Jackson.” I’m not all that alarmed.

Comment #20: junk science  on  07/13  at  12:51 AM

I think that the idea of false self that is talked about in the literature on narcissism is very much the opposite of the constructed personas being explored in Lady Gaga’s art and other pop culture phenomena. Constructed does not = false. The point of collapsing the distinction between representation and reality is not to divorce oneself from/escape reality, but free oneself up to creatively engage with reality. Reality from this perspective is not based in an objective point of view, but is an interplay of subjectivities, which means both that you are empowered to craft your identity but also that your identity is only meaningful when it engages in some substantive way with other people’s ideas, thoughts, etc. This kind of approach to truth gives you the ability to be dynamic with your sense of yourself, rather than rigid, and to find new angles from which to perceive the truths around you, often from being open to interplay with other people’s ideas, rather than being stuck in one way of understanding the truth. That is emotionally healthy.

Narcissists have a rigid sense of identity. They respond with rage when it is challenged. That identity may at some point have been based in truth, but because it is not dynamic and not creative, it becomes divorced from real experience over time, and the individual has to put in enormous efforts to keep maintaining the original image in spite of feedback from the rest of the world. This approach to truth is also - and this is where the whole narcissus thing comes in - totally uninterested in an interplay between subjectivities and instead places itself as the objective arbiter of truth.

So very not Lady Gaga and very much like the “disco sucks because it’s a threat to my style of music which has to be seen as the best by everyone or I’ll throw a tantrum” people.

Also, I would totally dance to “as humans go, you’re doing pretty great.”

Comment #21: Dymphna  on  07/13  at  02:29 AM

I dunno, I haven’t listened to pop music every since Carly Simon wrote that song about me.

Comment #22: Manju  on  07/13  at  07:31 AM

ya know, I spend some time in small town America and it’s interesting to contrast your observations about the lyrics of urban music with the lyrics of the country music that dominates the charts out there. Most of the songs revolve around the theme that life’s not perfect, the job really sucks, but people can be happy in small ways, usually through love of an equally unsuccessful yet truly good-hearted partner; or when that fails, which is not uncommon, through the bottle, getting stoned and raising hell. The fact of not having gone to college comes up in a surprising number of songs. 

Totally different concerns on the surface, but underneath it strikes me as much the same thing. Helping disempowered people feel a little bit good about their disempowered lives.

Comment #23: chuckling one  on  07/13  at  07:44 AM

Let me guess, manju, you read the words, but you’ve never heard them sung.

Comment #24: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  07/13  at  09:19 AM

My dad had a zoot suit and went dancing as often as possible in the 40s…as a teen in the 60s, my brother was into hard rock…as a 20-something in the 80s, I loved disco…my sister was into punk…it’s the same theme, generation after generation. The new kids’ music is rarely good enough for whomever considers themselves arbiters of taste in music.

Comment #25: Jodi  on  07/13  at  09:28 AM

@ chuckling one: But Boondocks isn’t exactly Coal Miners Daughter. Country and pop have been engaging in a long courtship since the 90’s and while some artists have fully embraced that influence and others have chosen to stay more traditional, there seems to be a growing opposition. There’s a group of artists that are aggressively pushing a “back to our roots” faux-redneck lifestyle and while they all sing about Hank and Cash, they all sound like Skynyrd. I think it’s disco backlash part 2; not as virulent or talented but plenty defensive and petty.

Comment #26: scrumby  on  07/13  at  10:45 AM

Man, I remember the circus around that study, earlier this year. It was irritating as hell.

I think that, in general, the people that complain about the “self-esteem generation” are simply being assholes because they think children now should have to suffer just like they did; this is sort of like what Amanda talked about in the cursive post. There’s a lot of noise being made about how kids getting told that they’re wonderful and worthy and getting participation ribbons and prizes even though they didn’t win (or even do particularly well) is somehow damaging our children by making them feel good about themselves. The end result, apparently, is that they feel “entitled” and that they deserve better. What I ask, whenever this comes up, is “Why are these BAD THINGS?” My generation has seen our parents completely consumed by their jobs, miserable from being overworked and underpaid, and we know from our own experience how much it sucks when your parent has to work on Sunday instead of going to your ball game, etc. I’m glad that there’s resistance.

And, in general, only rewarding children who are the very best at something sends the message that you shouldn’t bother UNLESS you’re good at something. That can be a real problem with activities that provide intellectual and/or physical exercise later in life. I played town soccer for years, and except for a couple seasons toward the end, I didn’t play on a very good team. Actually, I was on a terrible team for a number of seasons. But we got our little plastic trophies at the end, and you know what? We knew that we sucked, but it was really, really nice to be acknowledged. Being part of a team requires some commitment, and losing repeatedly is hard - but even if you lose, you’re getting exercise, and even a little token of a cheesy trophy is a nice bit of encouragement to stick with it.

So I’m a huge, huge proponent of participation ribbons, of “everyone’s a winner” under many circumstances, of telling every kid that they’re special and to keep trying. I think the adults complaining about this are full of shit - where’s the evidence that this is hurting anyone? People are going to learn what they’re good and not good at eventually, and, most importantly, when this matters (answer: in almost zero circumstances, except for professional ones). Childhood is way too early for that. I think we get people who are emotionally healthier and more willing to stand up for their right to a good life as adults. So I welcome this trend of “narcissism” in popular music. I think it’s a good sign.

Comment #27: grolby  on  07/13  at  11:46 AM

not mentioning disco strikes me as strange

You’re right, but one thing I didn’t realize until I read Abebe’s story: in part, he’s reacting to a study that analyzed pop lyrics since 1980.  So this “study,” which Abebe already notes is bullshit (it’s an extremely lazy lyrical analysis, on a small sample size, performed by somebody whose conclusion appears foregone) is even more useless because it doesn’t include the disco era.

Comment #28: Cris (without an H)  on  07/13  at  12:31 PM

Somehow, I doubt the reviewer is talking about the actual narcissistic movement, the Tea Party, which is an entire political movement dedicated to the proposition that the only people who are allowed to have authority or agency is people who look and act exactly like them.

Instead, we’re getting an article about how teh wimminz and brown people shouldn’t act uppity.

Comment #29: Punditus Maximus  on  07/13  at  12:55 PM

Punditus Maximus: did you read either Nitsuh Abebe’s article, or Amanda’s post about it? Or did you just scan for keywords?

Comment #30: Cris (without an H)  on  07/13  at  01:19 PM

I think the adults complaining about this are full of shit - where’s the evidence that this is hurting anyone?

Maybe I’ve read too many Elevatorgate posts, but I’m just picturing a lot of Nice Guys whining that they shouldn’t be denied the pussy ribbon just because they didn’t win the race. I know the real problem is thinking of women as prizes to be handed out. However, I think there’s some value in feeling like when you do get something, it’s because you really earned it. It’s true that Americans tend to think we shouldn’t bother doing something if we’re not the best at it, but I don’t think the solution is to give everyone a prize. That just reinforces that you shouldn’t play if you don’t get a prize.

Comment #31: junk science  on  07/13  at  01:41 PM

Besides, kids know participation ribbons are bullshit. Or at least they did when I was a kid.

Comment #32: junk science  on  07/13  at  01:42 PM

Grolby, I actually had someone tell me that kids need to experience failure or they won’t know how to be strong.  All of life isn’t a sports game. Just because you don’t get it right the first time doesn’t mean you failed; it means you keep trying until you figure it out and find your own solution.

I’ve always been a member of the try, try again school of life, and my kids have learned to be adept problem solvers. You have to look at the long term, not the short term. “Failure” is different from “disappointment”. You can’t shield your kids from disappointment—that happens to all of us. But failure? There’s a label you don’t want a kid to have to own, ever.

Comment #33: Jodi  on  07/13  at  02:08 PM

“Failure” is different from “disappointment”. You can’t shield your kids from disappointment—that happens to all of us. But failure? There’s a label you don’t want a kid to have to own, ever.

This sounds a lot like you’re just relabeling a failure as something else because you don’t like the word “failure.” The idea that we experience failure and learn to pick ourselves up from it is a common one and happens to all of us. You sound like you have the also-cliche “fear of failure.”

And it’s not unreasonable to expect someone to be “good” at something they want to try out. Another part of life is confronting a problem and learning how to master it. You don’t have to be the best at it, but you can figure out how to become “good” at something.

Comment #34: Tyro  on  07/13  at  02:38 PM

Perhaps preening is popular because it speaks to an audience of people who feel marginalized in their real lives and therefore are ready to hear a pop singer tell themselves that, contrary to popular opinion, they’re actually pretty great?

Jamey Aebersold is a jazz musician and educator who has an interesting exercise for musicians.

You play a note with your instrument.  Then you say to yourself, “that’s the most beautiful sound I’ve ever heard.”  Repeat over and over.

Sounds totally daft, right?  Yet one of the biggest problems musicians (and artists in general) have is being able to convince themselves that what they are doing is actually good.  Especially in a hothouse atmosphere like jazz, where technique and what the old dudes remember is always better than what these young kids are doing, it’s brutal to put yourself out there.

I’d also like to second Dymphna about Lady Gaga.  Real narcissism doesn’t develop after you’re an adult.  It’s a deficit in the personality building process.  The person didn’t get or perceive appropriate unconditional love and support as a child.  This may be because of abuse, or sometimes they simply suffer from dysphoria and nothing can make them happy, not their fault or anyone else’s. 

Regardless of the cause, the narcissist uses external definitions of success, goodness and rightness to prove his value.  They have the “right” friends and own the “right” things and do the “right” things.  Any challenge to these things is a deadly insult and results in a lot of emotion, because there is no internal emotional support for the person.  They feel worthless inside.

That’s why people who knowingly deal with narcissists talk about “supply” meaning the people the narcissist needs around him to validate his actions and choices to prop up his self-esteem.  If you’re not admiring him, the N is not happy.  He will either try to get you to admire him or, if he thinks that won’t work, leave to find someone else to suck dry.  It’s literally necessary for their self-esteem to have such supply around.

Funny that people who perceive narcissism in people who have appropriate self-love would like to make love conditional, which would probably result in more real narcissism.  Well, funny’s not the word, really.

Comment #35: oldfeminist  on  07/13  at  02:44 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I’ve_Gotta_Be_Me

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Way_(song)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_of_the_Road_(song)

And for our Spanish speaking audience:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Rey_(song)

Narcissism in popular music is nothing new, and nothing that women and minority artists invented.

Comment #36: Dilan Esper  on  07/13  at  02:47 PM

Junk Science - yeah, Nice Guys and participation prizes are a reeaaaal stretch. As for your other comments, what part of rewarding kids for trying precludes earning rewards for success? What part of my stating that we knew our participation trophies didn’t mean we had played well, but were an acknowledgment that we had played and worked hard, did you not understand? Where did I say that any of this supersedes the need or desire to get better at something? What is important is that children SHOULD be rewarded for effort - why do so many people have a problem with this idea?

This is what I mean - all of this bullshit and a complete failure to recognize both/and solutions. It’s frustrating. I got participation prizes as a kid (by the way, the problem with those damn ribbons is that there are lots better ways to reward effort than a stupid ribbon), yet somehow I have ended up as a very competent adult with a number of well-developed skills and good habits. I view the encouragement oI got for sticking with things that I wasn’t good at to be an important part of that,

Comment #37: grolby  on  07/13  at  04:13 PM

What part of my stating that we knew our participation trophies didn’t mean we had played well, but were an acknowledgment that we had played and worked hard, did you not understand?

Well damn. Enjoy your trophy, I guess.

Comment #38: junk science  on  07/13  at  04:29 PM

Let me guess, manju, you read the words, but you’ve never heard them sung.

Well, can you blame me? I’m supposed to listen to Mick Jagger wagging his finger at me? I’d rather hear Keith Richards lecture me on drug abuse.

Everyone knows I’m not narcissistic. In fact, if I were to identify with a Greek god it wouldn’t be Narcissus…it would be Zeus.

Comment #39: Manju  on  07/13  at  04:46 PM

Older generations have been calling younger generations self-absorbed and narcissist for approximately forever. Counter-cultures have also been calling mainstream culture narcissist for about as long.

Part of it is that young people tend to be more self-centered than older people. It’s a product of immaturity. And some people, especially the privileged, never grow out of it.

I leave you all with the immortal words of The Forgotten Rebels, just to add some lyrics to my point:

“They’re the me generation, they’re the assholes of the ‘80’s, they’re the me generation, they’ll be lonely old men and ladies…”

Comment #40: wondering  on  07/13  at  09:06 PM

Well damn. Enjoy your trophy, I guess.

I threw it away years and years ago. The physical object is not the point. The only thing I really wanted to say was that the disdain for, and in some cases even hysterical decrying of such things is unwarranted; at worst, they do no harm. The larger point that this post brought to mind got kind of lost in mostly-irrelevant participation ribbon nonsense, probably because I overemphasized it in my first comment.

Comment #41: grolby  on  07/13  at  11:36 PM

That would be appropriate, Manju, Zeus was always covering up his mistakes with sound and fury so he wouldn’t get caught out also.

Comment #42: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  07/13  at  11:40 PM

That would be appropriate, Manju, Zeus was always covering up his mistakes with sound and fury so he wouldn’t get caught out also.

Still, you gotta admit DAGCM…he did a great job with “Green Eggs and Ham”.

Comment #43: Manju  on  07/14  at  12:16 AM

Older generations have been calling younger generations self-absorbed and narcissist for approximately forever.

If only those goddamned kids would just pick up a phone every now and then.

Comment #44: junk science  on  07/14  at  12:27 AM

I’m kind of off topic at this stage, but: the music mentioned is almost all in my “cheer up songs” playlist (or at least, it’d fit in there—Pink’s “Raise Your Glass” comes up more often than “Perfect” because I like the visuals in the video better, but that’s personal preference).

Life sucks sometimes.  It especially sucks if you don’t have metric tons of priviledge to draw on to fix the things about it that you don’t like.  Hence, music.  The amount of joy demanded of music seems to correllate pretty strongly with the lack of joy in the rest of life.  Bonus points if it’s easy to sing along with.

I remember reading a paper that examined the same relationship between different types of religious music (mostly early southern gospel vs. english hymns, with a smattering of other denominations), but I have lost the link.  It’s out there somewhere if anyone wants to find it.

Comment #45: fluffster  on  07/14  at  12:45 AM

preening and pop music (rock too) go together like the proverbial eggs & bacon, peas & carrots, yin & yang, etc. it’s always been part of the schtick, since the first guy started beating on a hollow log, and the rest of the tribe began madly dancing to the strange noises he was making. assuming the preening displayed during a performance (an act), reflects the actual narcissism of the performer, absent any concrete evidence, is kind of egotistical, don’t you think?

Comment #46: cpinva  on  07/14  at  03:01 AM

@46 cpinva - Mick Jagger preened/s his ass off. No one seems to have a problem with it when it’s a white guy singing about how much tail he gets. And good god David Lee Roth?

Comment #47: snobographer  on  07/15  at  12:45 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.