Marlon Brando: The 1972 Pseudo-Event that Failed its Cause - Essay Example

Marlon Brando: The 1972 Pseudo-Event that Failed its Cause Introduction Publi is a core activity that occurs within the realm of celebrity. Through publicity, awareness of a celebrity is kept at the forefront of the public eye and allows for work to be more easily attained as the celebrity of a person helps to create an aura of popularity through which projects can be promoted and made profitable. Celebrity has been created around people who work the film industry, the sports industry, around people who are attached to public figures, and most recently through the elevation of people who have put themselves into the spotlight through other means than achievement, such as the type of celebrity that comes from being the child of those with money or from being attached to a reality show. While trying to avoid the paparazzi seems to be the desire of those who have a pubic persona, in truth, without publicity, the success of a career would most likely not reach the level that has put them in the public eye. In 1973 Marlon Brando was nominated for an Academy Award for his performance in The Godfather (1972). Brando attempted to use his status and celebrity, and the event of his receiving the award, in order to promote his personal agenda in defending the occupation of Wounded Knee and the plight of the Native Americans. The creation of pseudo-events have been a framing factor in the way in which the media has been used in order to create celebrity. The media uses celebrities to create sensationalized storied through which they sell their information product, while celebrities use the media in which to frame their image in the eye of the public in order to sell their product - themselves. Sometimes, however, as in the event of the 1973 Academy Awards, celebrities use their status in order to sell an idea to the public, to support an agenda that is outside of the framework of the reason that they had become celebrities. Celebrity As Daniel Boorstin suggested, celebrity is the state of being known for being known, a fabrication of human greatness based on expectations of greatness (Turner 5). The power of celebrity has reached proportions to where the public looks to the famous in order to find ‘truths’ rather than to the figures who are central to an issue. Cashmore states that society puts an “extravagant value” to the lives of celebrity through a preoccupation with people who will never actually have a connection to the average person (1). The context for the emergence of the concept of celebrity is defined by the conditions under which the right mix of circumstances allowed causes to trigger the overall effect. Cashman cites the seminal time period being the 1980’s in which the media began to expand and grow in influential power and at the same time, a general loss in confidence diminished the power and influence of political leadership (Cashman 2). However, the power of celebrity had been growing from the time of the emergence of the film industry. . Celebrity culture emerged from a consumerist society as people became commodities on a much larger scale than had ever before been established. As the perfection of scripted lives from the stories within the movies was transferred onto the embodiment of the characters through the actors who portrayed them, an expectation grew around the figure of the celebrity. That expectation was fed by the media who made reports that either confirmed or denied the perception that the public had about an individual. The job of the publicist was to try to control the information, attempting to provide a public framework for the sale of the celebrity image in order to create a forward continuation of his or her career. The media is a tool of sales, the release of information the advertising on which a person is commoditized. Celebrity is primarily an invention of the 20th century, an invention of media production in which the individual is known for being known (Giles 4). The concept is not defined by profession or achievement, but by virtue of media driven reporting that creates a branding of an individual in order to create an image or an impression of a characteristic package from which profit can be gained by virtue of the celebrity that has been created. In regard to actors, the studio system that was originally created by Hollywood and was held tightly under the control of studios in a world that had a limited media. Studios held contracts under which the actors became tightly controlled commodities, but with the end of the studio system in the 1950‘s, actors became free agents whose own people now had to individually manage the public perception (Sternheimer 148). A phenomenon grew out of the lack of contracted employment to the studios. Actors began to become more active in the world through the power of their celebrity, voicing their political opinions and promoting causes that they felt had value. Jane Fonda used her celebrity in order to protest the Vietnam War, even going so far as to host a public event where she traveled to Vietnam during the war, met with officials and was even allowed to see American prisoners of war (Anderegg 22). Publicity was created through the designs of the agendas of the individuals rather than the system, however, this has not always worked to the advantage of the actors as Tom Cruise saw during his public revelations of his own personal agenda. As a result of expressing his unconventional opinions and beliefs in regard to his affiliation with scientology, Cruise lost his association with Paramount studios who severed ties with the actor in the wake of a tide of negative publicity (Morton 305). Many of these public events where celebrities design a moment in which to reveal their own agendas can be termed as pseudo-events. According to Hedges, pseudo-events are “dramatic productions orchestrated by publicists, political machines, television, Hollywood, or advertisers” that may appear to be real but “they can evoke a powerful emotional response of overwhelming reality and replacing it with a fictional narrative that often becomes accepted truth” (Hedges 45). A pseudo-event changes perception and promotes a created reality in which the truth is shadowed by the imposition of an agenda that might be a reflection of truths, but is focused on the purpose of the celebrity at the center of the event. The pseudo-event is only as successful as the presentation of its purpose and the way in which the event is constructed through sound principles of social manipulation. Unfortunately, not all such events are created with an understanding of how best to manipulate the public. There have been times in which celebrities have used their own point of view in order to create pseudo-events that defy the purposes of public attention that is more desired. In doing so, they commit an almost heroic act towards their purpose in that the negative publicity will carve out a downward path in their career. An example of this can be seen in the event that was created by Sinead O’Conner when she used her moment on Saturday Night Live in order to make a stand against the Pope by tearing up his photo and crying out “Fight the enemy!” (Bruce 8). While she has done many powerful events towards causes such as Amnesty International, they are eclipsed by the imagery that she left through this staged event at an inappropriate moment. Her voice lost its credibility after that moment, her meaning lost in the abrasive imagery of her actions. The same can be said for the event that Marlon Brando created at the 1973 Academy Awards ceremony. The meaning of his actions was delineated by the way in which the event was created. The Event Marlon Brando was an American actor who is known as being the ultimate example of a method actor. His work is considered some of the best in American film history, but one aspect of his career that shadows his work is the activism that for which he used his celebrity in order to promote social cause agendas. Brando had a true passion for the plight of the Native American, his feelings for their culture driving him to use his celebrity in order to promote the cause of better treatment in film and in culture. While sometimes misguided, his use of his position in the public was often considered inappropriate and offensive, sometimes causing more harm to his cause than to bring attention to the issues that he promoted. One of these events occurred when he won the Academy Award for Best Actor in The Godfather. When the announcement came that Marlon Brando had won the award for Best Actor at the Academy Awards, Sacheen Littlefeather, the stage name for Maria Cruz a woman who had a mixed ancestry of Apache, Yaqui, Pueblo, and Caucasion and had most strongly identified with her Native American heritage, took the stage to speak for Brando, saying to the audience that Brando had prepared a long speech for her to say in declining the award, but the producers had only allowed her 45 seconds so she would just simply say that he could not accept the award. The audience reacted negatively to the speech and several actors in response made jokes at the expense of the moment that Brando created. Johansen related that Michael Caine “criticized Brando for “Letting some poor little Indian girl take the boos” instead of “standing up and doing it himself” (Johansen 205). The event occurred because of the civil protests at Wounded Knee where members of the Oglala Lakota tribe who lived at the Pine Ridge Reservation protests the poor conditions under which the tribe lived by taking over the town of Wounded Knee, South Dakota which was the site of one of the last massacres of the Indian wars (Sayer 2000). The Academy Awards of 1973 occurred during the 71 day stand-off of Wounded Knee and Brando’s refusal of the award was to help promote awareness about the plight of the Native Americans as well as a protest against the ways in which Native Americans had been portrayed in American film. His contention was that the social position of the tribes was related to the poor imagery that was created through the stereotypes that were observable on film. He states that “We murdered them. We lied to them. We cheated them out of their lands. We starved them into signing fraudulent agreements that we called treaties that we never kept. We turned them into beggars on a continent that gave life for as long as life could remember” (Johansen 205). Analysis of the Event Brando staged the event in order to deliver a message to the viewing audience. The problem with imposing a personal message during an event that is not associated with that message is that it becomes the subject of ridicule for its inappropriate presence rather for an examination of its content. When comparing this event to that of Sinead O’Conner when she tore the picture of the Pope, it can be observed that the imagery of the pseudo-event is so strong that it cannot manipulate the public towards its purpose, but will instead promote the celebrity as not being in step with their own privilege of being a celebrity. The hubris of the event takes precedence over the intent of the message. The message is lost because the public is so jarred that they momentarily overcome the power of the media to influence as the politicization oversteps the acceptance of the idea that celebrity equals authority. The glass cracks and the image is distorted, the message lost in the shattering of the image as the event breaks the spell of celebrity that is held over the public. The problem comes when a celebrity begins to believe that the power that he or she holds over the public is formed through a reality. Just as Boorstin formed the seminal opinion on the definition of celebrity - that they are known for being known - he framed the very reason that celebrity is fragile. It is not usually based upon on having more knowledge or intelligence than the public and is not usually based upon skills that are valuable beyond their profession. Using the power of celebrity is only as powerful as their actions show support for their belief systems and must be used within the framework of appropriate venues. This event diminished Brando’s cause, rather than supporting it, and diminished his voice for his beliefs. Conclusion Celebrity is created through an illusion of power that gives the holder of celebrity the position to speak to the public. However, if the celebrity abuses that power, the public can quickly turn in order to show that public figure how privileged they are to have their attention and that it must be used carefully. Just as the examples of Jane Fonda and Sinead O’Conner have provided, strong actions will have strong reactions by the public and the power of celebrity can be taken away just as easily as it was given. The nightmare of celebrity can be seen through those who have abused either their power or themselves and ended up in a storm of publicity that negatively impacted their careers. Extreme views, right or wrong, will be rejected when they are forced upon a public that has no interest in them. Brando used an awards ceremony in which the professions of film were being celebrated in order to assert his own agenda. This created event diminished the event for the others who were awarded that evening and disrespected the achievements of his fellow film industry workers. The public rewarded that disrespect in kind by having no interest in his message, but only in the sensationalism of his actions. Therefore, this type of pseudo-event has little purpose, the celebrity who uses the moment diminished in the public eye and the event shifting focus from the venue in a way that overwhelms the historic memory of what should have been remembered. Bibliography Anderegg, Michael A. Inventing Vietnam: The War in Film and Television. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991. Bruce, Tricia C. Faithful Revolution: How Voice of the Faithful Is Changing the Church. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. Cashmore, Ellis. Celebrity/culture. Abingdon: Routledge, 2006. Giles, David. Illusions of Immortality: A Psychology of Fame and Celebrity. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999. Hedges, Chris. Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle. New York: Nation Books, 2010. Johansen, Bruce E. Linguistic, Ethnic, and Economic Revival. Westport, Conn: Praeger, 2007. Morton, Andrew. Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography. New York, N.Y: St Martin's Paperbacks, 2009. Ritzer, George. Encyclopedia of Social Theory: 1. Thousand Oaks, CA [u.a.: Sage, 2005. Sayer, John W. Ghost Dancing the Law: The Wounded Knee Trials. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2000. Sternheimer, Karen. Celebrity Culture and the American Dream: Stardom and Social Mobility. New York: Taylor and Francis, 2011. Turner, Graeme. Understanding Celebrity. London: SAGE, 2004. Read More