Oh Yes, oh Yes, oh Yes, oh Yes, They both reached for the Gun, the Gun, for the Gun!

Can we just get this out of the way?  I'm a huge showtunes nerd.  Also, my great grandmother baby sat for Judy Garland  (back when she was Frances Ethel Gumm) and her mother was trying to make it in vaudeville.    I just want you all to know that I've got some major ties with fame.  Major.

Talking about vaudeville, as Enich has said, makes me think of Chicago.  Although I'll use any flimsy excuse to talk about showtunes, I think this one has some validity.  I linked to "The Press Conference Rag" from the 2002 film.  Although not my favorite song in the movie, you have to admire Richard Gere's rather charming performance.

Thinking about  how Gary mentioned that vaudeville kind of created fame as we know it (the press!  the celebrity!  the crushed dreams!), it made me think about the role of the press in Vaudeville, and the role of the press in the idea of fame.  Most of the reason that these things were so famous is because we're paying attention to them (it's fairly obvious).  With that, it made me think about how that kind of fame can become warped.

Tying it back to Am Con, look at the press Evelyn Nesbit got from a murder trial as compared to Coalhouse Walker's press.  Both thrive because the press, and the American public, made them into something bigger than what they were. Evelyn was a harlot and Coalhouse was an angry guy who set fires to things.  Yes, they stand for something greater, but at what point do we say enough is enough, and stop crediting someone as beyond what they are?  Is Coalhouse a victim?  Absolutely.  Is he a martyr?  I find that hard to swallow.

Part of the reason I think vaudeville was so popular was the publicity, and the warping of what's importance.  We thrive on this idea of a collective sensationalism, that we make things important because we get people to believe in them.  Does something become more or less valid as more people believe in it?  On the one hand, you have validation beyond yourself, and although we deny it, everyone kind of seeks validation from other people.  On the other, with more people, its more easily warped into something you never meant for your cause to be about.

I guess I'm just debating whether Vaudeville was important because we wanted it to be, or we needed it to be?  I'm not saying it's a binary system, but does anyone know where to stand on this?

Also, I've got a lot of blogs to catch up on...eek.