Can we first define celebrityhood more closely? Jerry Garcia? (my alter persona), or the current crop of People Magaziners? This is an interesting question to me, and I hope it gets developed here.
I think that all celebrities say something about us as a culture, because it is 'us' that dictate whether or not they will earn that celebrity status and become popular.
With that being said, there are many different types of celebrities.You can earn your celebrity status by being great at something, such as acting, singing, or some sort of athletic ability. Or by being funny and personable (in which case I think of Steve Irwin)
I think that all of these different types of people can earn "celebrity status" and I think that says alot about us as a culture. I think Steve Irwin demonstrates how we admire people who are true to thereselves, are charismatic, and pursue what they love to do, and yet share it with us. On the other hand I think that our "obsession" with tabloids and seeing peoples flaws and mistakes says alot about us as a culture too. (Maybe that seeing these 'celebrities' with their flaws makes us feel better about ourselves)
In all fairness, the politico have been using and abusing the ability to appeal to the masses for ages. The manufacturing of an image is no newer than statues of Roman Senators. It goes as far back as idolized pharaohs and perhaps beyond. Or do we really think they were birthed by gods?
There's also a reason research is done. They have to adjust to popular culture as it changes, largely beyond the control of the industry. And Amy brings up something important. It's not just that we want an ideal, but we also want to know that they are human enough that we can relate. A "too perfect" celebrity is no fun, because we cannot see ourselves in them at all. We then feel more distant and are unable to create any sort of relation at all be it real or imagined. Maybe this is why Jesus was a carpenter? A guy who bangs his thumb on occasion seems far more approachable than a guy who walks on water and can bring your grandma back from the dead as a party-favor.
Humanizing is required. However, the fact that we humanize them by making them out to be (deserved or not) sluts, drunkards, etc., probably says an awful lot about us as a society. The latest charity auction, etc., never seems to get the same press nor have the staying power of scandal. Sure, we admire people who achieve despite hardships (Lance Armstrong), but we'd all too often rather witness Britney and Lindsay with their drunken shenanigans and lack of attire. Perhaps, ultimately, we are just proving that--like all cultures which have come before us--we are simply all too human.
Which brings up a related question. Do we use celebrities to feel better about ourselves because we are like them? Do we see qualities we can like about ourselves, or as you indicate that perhaps we want to posses, i.e. that fits some sort of ideal to which we might aspire? Or do we use them to feel better about ourselves by taking a stance of moral superiority? Do we use them to normalize or aggrandize? Probably both. "Oh, look I'm just like a Lohan", can easily shift into, "I'm better than that little tweenie slut", quite easily.
Of course, considering we have pregnancy clubs, maybe that is precisely the ideal we are shifting towards. Maybe moral superiority will now consist of having larger numbers and more photos available on the web?
Commenting by HaloScan
