I have to tell you, I was already sick of hearing Michael Jackson referred to, endlessly, by the pop-culture-infatuated press as “an Icon!”
Now, the White House is doing it, too.
At today’s White House briefing, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said he and President Obama talked this morning about Michael Jackson’s death.
“He said to me that obviously Michael Jackson was a spectacular performer and a music icon and I think everybody remembers hearing his songs and watching him moonwalk on television during Motown’s 25th anniversary,” Gibbs said.
“But the president also said, look, he had aspects of his life that were sad and tragic,” Gibbs continued.
That Jackson’s life had its sad and tragic aspects is undeniable, but this media-sanctification is really going too far. As Jonah Goldberg writes:
…let’s pause for a moment on that word “icon.” It seemed the consensus adjective for the news networks. NBC ran a special on two “American Icons” — Fawcett and Jackson. Every cable network (including Fox, for the record) used the word “icon” to describe him as if this was some sort of safe harbor, a word everyone could agree on. “Love him or hate him,” the implied logic went, “he was an ‘icon.’”
Yes, well, maybe so. But that doesn’t let you off the hook. Even though the term sounds neutral, it isn’t. An icon, technically speaking, is a religious symbol deserving of reverence and adoration. The networks may not have intended to use the word that way, but they certainly showed an unseemly amount of reverence and adoration for the man.
Spot-on. I urge you to read Goldberg’s whole piece, because his smart, quickly tossed off remarks will get you wondering at the dumbing-down of America, and how our overpraised children and our over-idoled unto-mediocrity culture has become unable to make distinctions between holiness and hype, between measured responses to situations, versus over-emotive sensationalism meant to appeal to our schmaltziest instincts.
Coverage of the death of Michael Jackson has reduced big-time-professional journalism to purveyors of “very special episodes” of the After-School-After-America Special.
If we remember our Moses and our Golden Calf, we know that human beings have always created idols. Once upon a time, though, we at least understood that these godlings were wholly created from our own need to adore something and endow it with qualities of transcendence, and we were smart enough to be a little embarrassed about fainting for Sinatra, or screaming for John, Paul, George and Ringo. We understood that such cultural moments were mostly silliness, and considered that idol-making was a rare and harmless pastime.
It’s not so rare, anymore, or harmless. As our post-modern society becomes increasingly post-faith, we watch our instincts to raise up idols more frequently indulged. Is there a nation that does not have one (or more) “Idol-creating” type television show at the top of the ratings pile? We narcissists live vicarious dreams as we construct these godlings, carry them about on chairs of never-ending affirmation (when was the last time you expect Michael Jackson (or President Obama) heard the word “no”?) then we watch them crumble under the weight of material excess and broken illusions.
And we resurrect them when they die, and place them in our tin-ceilinged firmaments. And we forget that they were ever idols. We call them Icons.
Let me supply a quick primer – for the press and the general public – about the difference between an idol and an Icon.
An Icon looks out from an Intrinsic light and points to its Source; there are no shadows in which to hide
An idol looks out from man-created light, and points to no one but himself; then walks into the shadows
An Icon looks you straight in the eyes and dares you to pursue truth.
An idol wears shades and has his spokesperson tell you what you want to hear.
An Icon teaches you how to focus, how to quiet down, focus, collect oneself and hear the small, still voice.
An idol teaches throws noise, images and issues at you, non-stop, scatters your thinking and deafens you to any voice but his.An Icon whispers wisdom.
An idol shouts sound-bites and mindless trendspeak.
An Icon inspires you to chant to the Most High.
An idol inspires you to chant to him.
Currently, my favorite Icon is this gorgeous image, from The Holy Transfiguration Monastery. It is called “Lord, Save Me,” and it is much richer, and more beautiful, when viewed in person. The screen does not quite do it justice:
Matthew 14:25-31:
During the fourth watch of the night, 8 he came toward them, walking on the sea. When the disciples saw him walking on the sea they were terrified. “It is a ghost,” they said, and they cried out in fear. At once (Jesus) spoke to them, “Take courage, it is I; 9 do not be afraid.” Peter said to him in reply, “Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water.” He said, “Come.”
Peter got out of the boat and began to walk on the water toward Jesus. But when he saw how (strong) the wind was he became frightened; and, beginning to sink, he cried out, “Lord, save me!” Immediately Jesus stretched out his hand and caught him, and said to him, “O you of little faith, 10 why did you doubt?”
As long as he kept his eyes on Jesus, Peter had been able to do the impossible, the unimaginable. It was when he looked away, focused instead on the tumult surrounding him, that he doubted. And as soon as he doubted, he began to sink. As soon as he thought of himself, focused on his perceived reality, Peter was pulled under.
This is a particularly restful Icon. The colors are lush, the waves in foreground and background are wonderfully hypnotic, and the shore invites a trek into the wilderness. But it is the beautifully-rendered, compassionate and loving face of Christ that holds and keeps your focus. He reaches out to Peter, whose own face is open with a dawn of understanding, and Christ, meeting his eyes, uplifts him.
This Icon contains the whole of the Gospel – lessons of reverence, trust, divinity, openness, vulnerability, kindness, limitations, wonder, mystery, human potential, miracles and yes, self-limitations and boundaries. That is what an Icon does; bestows positive instruction on The Way, tells the Gospel within the borders of an image.
Perhaps there are some who can look at an “iconic” photograph of Michael Jackson on his toes, or Marilyn Monroe with her skirt blowing about her, or Barack Obama with his chin in the air, and read those same lessons, find the Good News. But I suspect that a snapshot rendered in noise, by humans, of humans, for humans, does little to point the viewer toward anything greater than himself, or herself, and thus perpetuates a culture of projected narcissism, where -adept at worshipping nothing- we worship nothing but ourselves.
UPDATE: Missed this earlier, but don’t you miss it, Spengler on Jackson; Anti-Priest of an Anti-Congregation Encounters Anti-Life:
Just what sort of priest was Jackson, and what was his congregation? In the Judeo-Christian world, music enhances individuality within the congregation. That is clearest in the singing of four-part hymns, something that Protestant congregations learned as a matter of routine (the standard teachers’ manual used in Saxony in Bach’s childhood had sections on reading, arithmetic, and four-part singing). The harmonious combination of different voices recreates the unity-in-individuality of a Judeo-Christian congregation.
There is very little harmony in Jackson’s songs; they depend on a few simple, phrases and a great deal of rhythmic repetition. Rather than find himself in the congregation, the individual loses himself in the crowd.
You’ll want to read it all.
June 26th, 2009 | 4:28 pm | #1
Tell me, then, how do you feel about Alaska Gov. Palin referring to a photo of her & her son as:
a photo of the Governor and baby Trig that has become an iconic representation of a mother’s love for a special needs child
Wouldn’t that be an “idolatrous” photo? Come on, let’s see some outrage about that!!
Or cast that mote out of your eye before you move your fingers again!
[Well, I had not SEEN that quote before, but now that I have, I frankly wish she had not used the damn word "iconic." Both because it's incorrect and because I disagree with it. I have no problem disagreeing with people on the right. I left the left because they wouldn't allow me to do so. And my, you're quick to accuse, aren't you? - admin]
June 26th, 2009 | 4:30 pm | #2
Icon or Idol, please get over it media and get back to work. For crying out loud, I’m watching Cavuto and he is even covering it.
June 26th, 2009 | 4:48 pm | #3
Anchoress, you’ve written about icons before, and now I’m getting interested. Any good informational links you could publish or re-publish? Thanks!
June 26th, 2009 | 4:52 pm | #4
There is a song called “Big Enough” by Ayesha Woods where the refrain says” I’m not goin’ to box you in. You’ve been doing big things since the world began.”I am currently going through RCIA and learning wonderful things one of which is that humans do focus to much on celebrities and make them into idols. This takes the focus away from where it should be.
These idols have limits since they are human which makes the world try to box God in and limit his power. I think the Icon as well as the scripture above and the Gospel reading from Sunday re: Christ calming the storm are excellent representations of God’s power.We need to remember that His power knows no bounds.
I really enjoy your blog and have found it plus the links excellent resources for my journey. Thank you for sharing.
June 26th, 2009 | 5:31 pm | #5
Amen, sister! The sad facts of the day remain: we need not look to the MSM to distinguish between an icon and a golden calf or to see the similarities of the priests at the alter of Molech and the priestess chanting”Abortion is a blessing”. I don’t have a television. Even my favorite conservative radio talkers were prattling on about MJ today…..so, enough of them. I might do well to remember how much better I like the sounds of His birds in the trees outside my window.
June 26th, 2009 | 5:41 pm | #6
Wonderful distinction of idols and icons, Ms. Scalia. I want to print it or get a cross-stitch of it.
Also, for the first commenter, can you source that? It sounds like a comment someone makes on a photo, and if Gov. Palin made it herself, why would she refer to herself as something so impersonal as ‘the Governor’?
June 26th, 2009 | 6:36 pm | #7
The excess of attention paid to Jackson’s life and death at the moment is unfortunate; more important things are happening this very day that will directly affect many more people. But at the same time it is a reality that our popular culture expresses its admiration for talent – not to mention virtuosity – with faddish idolatry. I was born in the mid-60s and was never a Jackson fan, but I acknowledge his influence and understand that talent flows from flawed, as well as flawless, sources. It may have been silly to swoon over Sinatra, but really, the silliness was in treating him as a Perfect Being – not in recognizing his incredible talent for what it was. Such is the influence of popular culture, and this (combined with the unexpected timing of his death) is why the Michael Jacksons get more attention than, say, an influential writer or classical musician who lives well into his 90s. There’s nothing wrong with giving Mr. Jackson his due. But the tragic figures and the self-destructive geniuses will always capture our attention when their talent is apparent, and popular culture will continue to mistake talent for strength of character.
June 26th, 2009 | 6:56 pm | #8
Well said, Anchoress. I received a beautiful icon of Madonna and child from my wife for Christmas. As a matter of fact, it was the one you posted from Councilliar Press!
Your reference to Peter keeping his eyes on Jesus is so very very relevant today. Thanks for the reminder.
I have to admit to an earlier certain atavistic interest in the coverage of Jackson on CNN and Fox. Fortunately, I just said, enough is enough and have avoided the msm’s coverage thru out today.
June 26th, 2009 | 7:32 pm | #9
I have emailed Fox News and begged them to stop with this Michael Jackson hysteria. He was a musician that made a lot of people happy, but he was a man who couldn’t be happy himself. His family lost their meal ticket but the fans lost his music. But enough is enough, he is gone. I will not watch tv this weekend if this is all that’s on.
June 26th, 2009 | 8:36 pm | #10
M. Bouffant, you were pretty rude but since you brought it up…
“The definition for iconic from Answers.com is this: Of, relating to, or having the character of an icon.
Having a conventional formulaic style. Used of certain memorial statues and busts.”
The quote was from a Palin spokeswoman, not Sarah Palin herself. In this case, her use of the word is appropriate. Very appropriate.
You might want to reconsider your comment:
“Or cast that mote out of your eye before you move your fingers again!”
June 26th, 2009 | 9:51 pm | #11
I turned off Fox news (and all other networks) last night and watched reruns of old shows. Today I had animal planet on all day. I already can’t stand that one newscaster – I’ve blocked his name at the moment – oh, Shepherd Smith, or something, and I just couldnt’ take him going on and on about this. If you listen for even two minutes, it’s like they are trained to say the name (MJ) over and over again to catch your attention, as though I would be glued to the TV over this, and would suddenly stop what I was doing to be glued to them telling me nothing because there is nothing to know yet.
Then early this morning I turned it on and there it all was again. They are media whores like the rest when it comes to things like this.
And the whole time I’m thinking the poor Iranians are screwed. (Is that word allowed?) The people fighting for freedom have been trumped by a pop star who died young. I’m sad for him and his fans, but was over it in about two minutes.
June 26th, 2009 | 10:06 pm | #12
I think I know the Sarah Palin picture in question, and the word “iconic” seems appropriate to me; the Mother and Child image is, of course, archetypally iconic, and there’s no reason why a photograph couldn’t capture that. Surely an icon is a representation, a reflection, while an idol is an object of worship.
But interesting. I’d like to read more thoughts on this subject too.
June 26th, 2009 | 10:20 pm | #13
My pet-peeves are “brave,” “courageous,” “heroic” and “tragic.”
The first three are used when talking about various celebrities and their health problems. Sorry, while I have sympathy for anyone battling cancer or whatnot, bravery is not an accurate description. When guys get up and strap on a flack-jacket, a metal helmet and 120 lb pack and patrol the streets of Godforsakenstan for their FOURTH tour of duty – that’s bravery and courage and they are our heroes.
Finally, NOTHING in Michael Jackson’s life was tragic. Tragedy is a child who has to cram a lifetime into 10 short years because of cancer. Tragedy is being born in abject poverty in the Sudan.
It even fits the description given to it by Moonlight Graham in “Field of Dreams.” Ray Kinsella says to Graham, who played one-half of one inning for a major league career, “Fifty years ago, for five minutes you came within… y-you came this close. It would KILL some men to get so close to their dream and not touch it. God, they’d consider it a tragedy.
To which “Doc” Graham replied, “Son, if I’d only gotten to be a doctor for five minutes… now that would have been a tragedy.”
[I think a life lived in pursuit of love that has accepted empty adoration in its place is always tragic. It suggests an interior poverty that makes me feel truly sad for a person. - admin]
June 26th, 2009 | 11:15 pm | #14
I am not so sure that the word icon is used improperly here because I think the word has gained an additional meaning derived from its original meaning. The media are using it in the more modern sense of a person who sums up or epitomizes an era and whose death brings that era to a close. This is in keeping with that other function of icons to represent in brief something much larger.
However, I think you are entirely correct to remind us that before these people become icons, they were first idols and generally lived as such. What they represent is indeed one dimensional and limited to the human level. I don’t disagree with you over your resentment at the term being co-opted from its original religious meaning, but unfortunately the English language doesn’t stop for anyone. Icon has come to mean something in the purely human cultural sense whether we like it or not.
[I think one can put a qualifier in there, "Pop-icon" or "musical icon" or something like that, and it is clearer, but first why not explain what a real icon is? Words are already losing their meanings too quickly, these days. admin ]
June 27th, 2009 | 12:14 am | #15
I hadn’t followed Michael Jackson much. I took some time to view the parade of MJ videos today. It looked to me that he hit a point in his career where, from that point onward, he insisted on grabbing his crotch in everything he did. That was a turn off. I did enjoy his pre crotch grabbing offerings.
June 27th, 2009 | 3:09 am | #16
“Is there a nation that does not have one (or more) “Idol-creating” type television show at the top of the ratings pile?”
Japan
June 27th, 2009 | 9:48 am | #17
Thank you for including the link to the Orthodox web site. We have our normal icon corner in the living room for use during the Daily Office and when the priest comes to administer communion to my wife. We have other icons reserved for setting up another corner in our home office, but I have been looking to add a few new ones. I saw several on that site that I really like.
On the Jackson coverage. I bought several of his records back in the day. But I never listen to it any more and never played his stuff during my days as an oldies DJ 1995-2001. And today I am at the point of saying “he’s dead – get over it!”
June 27th, 2009 | 10:29 am | #18
So what do you call those little things on the desktop of your computer that you click to make a program run or a file open? The word “icon” comes from the Greek, eikon: an image, a likeness, a portrait. Grave paintings and vase paintings, sacred or pornographic, were both “icons”; so were statues or the images in the mosaics on the bathroom floor. There may be a difference between an icon and an Icon, but the term is far more neutral than Goldberg thinks.
(Me, I find the whole thing annoying. Can’t get too upset over the death of a chronic child molester, myself, and the first thing I thought when I heard of this was, ‘Oh, great… there goes all the coverage of Iran.’)
June 27th, 2009 | 10:48 am | #19
I love, love, love this blog, and learn so much here. Nourishes my spirit; makes me think, question, meditate, laugh, scream. . . Much thanks.
June 27th, 2009 | 10:52 am | #20
I’m with Dellbabe68. I have been watching baseball and reruns of old shows since Thursday evening. My family calls me a FOX News junkie but I’ve had enough already with the Michael Jackson coverage. When Neil Cavuto is covering his death, something is amiss with the media. Is this all we are going to hear for the next 6-8 weeks until the toxicology reports are in? My condolences to Michael Jackson’s family for their loss but it’s time to move on to the other news in the world.
June 27th, 2009 | 10:53 am | #21
Well, I was in the grocery that day, and some of the 20ish clerks were buzzing about Jackson’s death, and a 15 or 16 year old said, “Who’s Michael Jackson?”, so “this too shall pass”.
The one song of his to which I actually liked the lyrics (he did not write them) is “Man in the Mirror” from the late 80’s because it has a good message:
“If you wanna make the world a better place
take a look at yourself and then make the change” (I would add – with God’s grace and help.)
I did not care for his performance of it – he was a cute little kid during the Jackson 5 days, but after that, not so much.
I agree with some here that the word “icon” is commonly used outside of the original meaning.
June 27th, 2009 | 11:39 am | #22
[...] Jackson was an IDOL, not an ICON – UPDATE – The Anchoress [...]
June 27th, 2009 | 12:18 pm | #23
Anchoress, thanks for posting this. While there was much tragedy in Jackson’s life, the real tragedy was that he went with the adoration and not with getting help.
As a psychotherapist, I work daily with teens who have suffered abuse, physical, sexual and emotional. Each of them struggle daily with the beasts in their lives, attempting to purge the demons and hopefully get right with themselves and with a belief in the Almighty.
Their struggle puts those who “genuflect” at the alter of celebrity to shame.
June 27th, 2009 | 12:58 pm | #24
[...] The Way it Was: Is Rockefeller Obsolete? No, but the way taxes and the economy are headed, Rockefeller would be leaving the country. ————————————- The Real UN Resolution 242, by Sammy Benoit, who finds Arab Democracy Advocates Upset With Obama ————————————- First the topless exhibitionist, now the full monty ex-mayor. Stay off the sauce, guys. ————————————- The Anchoress explains the difference between an idol and an icon. [...]
June 27th, 2009 | 2:25 pm | #25
Michael Jackson’s death has heralded the demise of or at least the exposure of the failures of the infantile liberal culture of the United States of America centered in the North East and California.
The obvious markers of this failure has been the rampant tax and spend policies of liberal states and their downward spiral but with the top of the pyramid being the election of the “empty suit” Barrack Obama as President of the United States.
This is not a result of policies or mindsets of the past 5 years but the culmination of the dumbing down of the academic and media world over the past 50 years by a liberal religion that has denied critical thinking and put to death the concept of decency.
Whereas the mindless American liberal cultural and dumbed down media (see Katy Couric) wax eloquently about Michael Jackson the “icon” ( which should really be idol) many more clear minded Europeans have a different view.
Michael Jackson- “the icon of our disturbing modernity”, a “mutant” whose music was “kitsch” , “neither black nor white; neither old nor young; neither child nor adult; neither man nor woman” but rather a “sort of androgynous imp” said some European newspapers.
An American columnist (Jonah Goldberg) wrote the following:
I say: Who cares who his famous friends were? Who cares what a “fascinating” person he was? If you want to talk about his death as an end of an era, have at it. But that’s not what the Barbara Walters set is doing.
I know that Michael Jackson wasn’t convicted of the despicable crimes he was accused of. And that’s why he never went to jail. Three cheers for the majesty of the American legal system. But in my own personal view, he wasn’t exonerated either. Nor was he absolved of his crimes because he could sing, moonwalk, or sell 10 million records. (Though many of us suspect the money and fame he made from those things is precisely what kept him out of jail).
And, while I merely think he was a pedophile, I know he was not someone responsible parents should applaud, healthy children emulate, nor society celebrate.
And while we’re at it, his relatively early death wasn’t “tragic.” He was one of the richest people in the world. He spent his money on perpetual childhood and he was perpetually with children not his own.
Meanwhile, in the last ten days, we’ve seen or heard of remarkable people who’ve given their lives for freedom in Iran. We’ve heard of innocents killed because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. In the last decade, America has lost thousands of heroes in noble causes and thousands of innocent bystanders who were denied the simple joys of life through no fault of their own. Those deaths are tragic, and we’re hard pressed to think of more than a handful of names to put with the long line of the dead.
If anything, Michael Jackson’s life, not his death, was tragic. (end of article piece by JG)
Michael Jackson’s death is indeed a newsworthy event but not for the self praising and mindless reasons of the cultural and media elite. It is newsworthy because it represents the death (or the beginning of the demise) of an infantile, dumbed down culture represented by the “political Paris Hilton” Joe Biden and such liberal cultural hotshots as Perez Hilton.
As this demise unfolds look out for the liberal, statist class in its death throes i.e. the pro- death(I believe life starts at conception) Nancy Pelosio on steroids !
June 27th, 2009 | 2:30 pm | #26
[...] Again. [...]
June 27th, 2009 | 5:08 pm | #27
Unfortunately, while the media spent 48 hours on wall-to-wall coverage, other far more important news was simply pushed aside.
Mr. H
http://www.allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/
June 27th, 2009 | 5:40 pm | #28
[...] I wrote about an Icon I am currently studying a great deal, in my prayer. It is called “Lord, Save [...]
June 27th, 2009 | 7:14 pm | #29
[...] Some news that isn’t about Michael Jackson. I’m grateful, though, to The Anchoress for explaining the difference between an icon and an idol; I was going to write about the [...]
June 28th, 2009 | 10:38 am | #30
“a photo of the Governor and baby Trig that has become an iconic representation of a mother’s love for a special needs child”
i⋅con⋅ic
/aɪˈkɒnɪk/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ahy-kon-ik] Show IPA
Use iconic in a Sentence
–adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of an icon.
2. Art. (of statues, portraits, etc.) executed according to a convention or tradition.
The Palin statement says this is an image that represents a well-known artistic representation — the Madonna and child, something spanning several cultural and religious traditions. This is an accurate statement.
There is a world of difference between “icon” as a noun versus the adjective correctly used. Michael Jackson was no saint, nor was he an object of worship, and if he were, he would be an idol. While a mother’s love for her child is not idolatrous but iconic.
It is the height of absurdity that the idiot troll could even see a parallel here, when the two scenarios are different as night and day. Palin stood by her principles and honored life, while knowing her child would be imperfect, despite personal sacrifice. Michael Jackson was by all accounts except our legal system, a pedophile who refused to grow up and latched onto small children instead, even making his children wear burqas and dangling “Blanket” from a balcony.
June 28th, 2009 | 11:38 am | #31
Heads up, Michael Jackson might have faked his death. I have the video, taped from an early morning CNN broadcast (which has not since been repeated) that purports to prove it.
If this is true, this is big.
[And the saddest part is, someone, somewhere is going to believe all of that! LOL - admin]
June 28th, 2009 | 3:51 pm | #32
I KNOW Michael faked his death. I asked Elvis yesterday.
June 28th, 2009 | 11:30 pm | #33
[...] of us have great long ago memories of these two icons idols*…..may they rest in [...]
June 28th, 2009 | 11:32 pm | #34
[...] On Michael Jackson June 28, 2009 Posted by Jehuda in Uncategorized. Tags: Catholicism, Entertainment, News trackback The Anchoress: An idol, not an icon. [...]
June 29th, 2009 | 3:25 pm | #35
Of course, it’s also possible that an entire generation of badly educated geeks are at this very minute still baffled by the absence of any Michael Jackson icon on their computer screens…
June 29th, 2009 | 10:54 pm | #36
[...] on the Jackson phenomenon: Too much Michael Jackson?, Some Quick Thoughts on Michael Jackson, Jackson was an IDOL, not an ICON – UPDATE, and King Michael: Thriller was Michael Jackson’s masterpiece. It was also his curse. In [...]
July 2nd, 2009 | 11:40 am | #37
[...] Dear Readers: I was reading a wonderful piece by my blogging icon, the Anchoress (perhaps she would have preferred me to use the word “idol”, but as my admiration for her has a spiritual aspect, I think my use of the term is correct). She [...]
July 18th, 2009 | 2:09 am | #38
[...] Sigh. Let us remind ourselves about Icons and Idols. [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact