Celebrities Passing

Farrah Fawcett, Michael Jackson, Ed McMahon...the past few weeks have seen a host of "celebrities" passing from this life. These deaths--in several cases untimely--remind us that when it comes to mortality and the "sands of time," we are all equal, regardless of our acclaim. At my age, I find that I now read each day's obituaries in the daily newspaper rather religiously. I find in interesting to read the stories of "common" folk who didn't know the spotlight of popular fame; many of them were heroes in his or her own right, but all were children of God and beloved of family and friends.

Speaking of fame, I read a national column recently wherein the author suggested that our most recent generations have been producing more "celebrities" than "famous" persons. His distinction was that a celebrity is anyone who finds his or her "fifteen minutes of fame," as Andy Warhol put it. One can be a celebrity simply by landing in the limelight, even by accident. "Famous" persons, however, are those whose recognition comes by way of true and sustained accomplishments, whether in the arts, academics, literature, sports, or national/international affairs. Again, the columnist suggests that we aren't producing many "famous" persons, just celebrities. Others have observed that neither are we producing "statesmen" in the political realm. Why is this, one wonders?

Maybe it is because we have lost a sense of personal "mission" or destiny. There was a time when young men or women would ruminate endlessly over the question, "What is my purpose?" or "What mark can I make in this world?" as they chose their paths. Today, the questions seem to have de-evolved to: "How can I become a celebrity?" or "What do I have to do to make the most money in the shortest amount of time?" The goal of many today is to make their first million by age 30 so they can settle down to a life of leisure at an early age. This doesn't bode well for a society and a culture BEGGING for leaders and visionaries.

Another possible reason for this leadership deficit is the proliferation of "instant" and intense means of communication. One must deliberate over a letter, writing in complete thoughts and reflecting on personal philosophy. Email began the erosion of thought by allowing instant transmission upon completion of a thought or two, which gave birth to the tacky electronic shorthand such as LOL and :-). Now we have "Twitter," which limits expression to 140 characters. I am reminded of an episode of "Cheers" in which Diane, the erudite protagonist, inquired in the bar: "Who would like to go to the back room and have an intelligent discussion about this issue?" Seeing no takers, she queried a second time: "Alright then, everyone then with a two-bit opinion...", to which the throngs responded. Modern technology is possibly giving undue bandwidth to the two-bit opinion instead of the forty-minute address of a statesman?
Well, this posting wouldn't fit on "Twitter," and I'm not even sure it will fit on Blogger.com when I hit the "post" button! Remember what one writer of Scripture stated: "Without a vision the people perish." Shalom, friends.