Tomas Jeffrey Hanks - Celebrity - Literature review Example

Fame and Celebrity Being famous and celebrity are descriptions that are often interchanged. More precisely used, though, fame is marked out by honor and acclaim rendering the truly famous deserving of the recognition; a celebrity, on the other hand, is someone who’s simply widely known (through the media) for nothing in particular (Giles 2000, pp. 4; see Gabler [n.d.]). Daniel Boorstin (1961) held that the famous (or the Big Man) are known for their achievements, while the celebrities (or the Big Name) by their image or trademark – as they are “(persons) who (are) known for (their) well-knownness” (pp. 47, 57 and 61). For instance, Eleanor Roosevelt and Colin Powell are famous. Paris Hilton and Dwayne Johnson, a.k.a. “The Rock,” are celebrities (see Pace [n.d.]). But, of course, there are famous celebrities. Tiger Woods and Hillary Clinton are one of them. They are people of great accomplishments who also court and embrace the limelight (see Pace [n.d.]). And Tomas Jeffrey Hanks is definitely among them (see Gabler [n.d.], pp. 3)! Tom Hanks: Famous and Celebrity Tom Hanks – as he is more popularly known -- made his start of his entertainment career in television, making guest appearances on the shows Taxi (1978-1982), The Love Boat (1977-1986), Family Ties (1982-1989) and Happy Days (1974-1984). Not long after, he was quickly given his own sitcom called Bosom Buddies (1980-1982). In the 1980’s, he was given a big break with Big (1988). He holds the recognition for being one of just two great talents who have won back-to-back Oscar awards: his first for Philadelphia (1994), and his second for Forrest Gump (1995). In addition, Hanks has starred in five movies that have made over $200 million at the box office. These movies were The Da Vinci Code (2006), Cast Away (2000), Toy Story 2 (1999), Saving Private Ryan (1998) and Forrest Gump. More astonishingly, Hanks’ movies have a total gross of $4 billion. He’s also one of the only three actors to have had seven consecutive movies grossing over $100 million (see Tom Hanks 2009). Besides being an actor, Hanks is also a successful movie producer. His Playtone Productions company has a growing track record of creating hits, including Charlie Wilson’s War (2007), My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002), Mamma Mia (2008), and the HBO drama Big Love (2006-2010), the miniseries Band of Brothers (2001), The Pacific (2009) and John Adams (2008) (see Tom Hanks 2009). Referring to him as still one of the few stars who can command up to $20 million per film, Forbes.com (2009) ranked Hanks 39th among the top 100 celebrities in the world. Times magazine, for its part, numbered Hanks 59th among the world’s most influential person (see Time.com 2009). And, these are all Tom Hanks’ accomplishment -- despite his being a college drop out from California State University Sacramento. The Phenomenon of Personal Celebrity There is no denying that people have always been recognizing the power of celebrity (Gamson 1994, pp. 186). Grinin (2009, pp. 183) describes a personal celebrity – e.g., Tom Hanks – as “a definite kind of more or less widespread information about a person, which in a certain sense distinguishes him or her from the overwhelming majority of those people who possess the same professional or social characteristics.” Too, adds Giles (2000, pp. 4), being a personal celebrity is in itself a process rather than a state of being. But, what precisely does it take one to be famous and celebrity? Or, how does one become famous and celebrity? Firstly, it would serve us very well by stating that being a celebrity is an insistently a social construction. That is, celebrities are actually “made” – thanks to mass media that play a leading role in governing the population. And, social construction is not without sociological purpose. As such, celebrities – as social constructs – do serve a political function – among others – such as by providing a suitable role models or morality tales that either settle ordinary people’s issue against their subordination or provide escapism from adversities of life. Rojek (2001, pp. 37) points out that Tom Hanks’ Forrest Gump was essentially communicating such moralistic ideas as good is victorious over evil or merit is rewarded and justice prevails. Hanks similarly delivered on the subject of decent heroism in Saving Private Ryan. The way society constructs its heroes, however, changes. In the past, observes Bauman (2005) fame proceeded from someone’s extraordinary deed which was always remembered for purpose of restating or reaffirming their lasting relevance and importance; to date, the reasons which bring one to limelight are the least consideration (pp. 49). It appears that the primary requirement for anyone to be famous and a celebrity is visibility, which the current mass media generously provides and for which an entire industry that manages the business of transforming unknowns into celebrities thrives (see Rein et al. 2006, pp. 3, 4-5, 11; Gamson 1994, pp. 57). With visibility as a context, the making of celebrities would proceed as a process (i.e., which is psychological in nature, as Giles [2000, pp. 4] would posit). Redmond & Holmes (2007) describes this process as “ceremonies of ascent to fame by the celebrities”. First, they are raised above the public. Accordingly, this social and cultural process is termed elevation. And, celebrities are literally elevated by the billboards and magnified screens where their images are posted above the eye-level of cinema-goers. Besides the billboards, there are popular, mass-circulation magazines that do glossy photo-journalism and document the private lives of the celebrities – i.e., their marriages, love relationships, their flings, homes, holidays, divorces, births, medical and beauty operations, and deaths of celebrities. There are also ubiquitous biographies of celebrities, generously providing information about the successes and shortcoming of the celebrities. These media alternately portray celebrities as paragons of perfection when they win awards or accomplish a feat, or as epitome of decadence should they become associated with scandals. Too, when they are portrayed in positive light, celebrities are presented as though they possess skills and abilities beyond what ordinary mortals have. We may have as an instance here celebrities with little formal education, but who is portrayed by the media as experts on even complicated issues (see Redmond & Holmes 2007, pp. 176). Tom Hanks definitely benefits from this elevation drive. When he has new film, he’s naturally a subject of media saturation campaign. It’s, of course, a market requirement that he is broadly distributed, so to speak, to ensure that his stories reach the widest number of fans. But, more so, this media campaign is deliberately designed to maintain a considerable “abyss” between the celebrity and the fan – which is explained by the need for the celebrities not to neutralize the charisma on which their status as exalted and extraordinary figures depend (Redmond & Holmes 2007, pp. 176). The actor who starred in dramatically contrasting films demonstrating breadth of character (see Milicia 2009) made fun of himself on Saturday Night Live, described on Larry King what it was like to work with Madonna, and discussed his love of nature in an interview for the Nature Conservancy magazine. There are numerous websites, too, that feature personal and professional information about him – including photos and videos – and run trivia contests about the actor. In so doing, he reached many diferent types of entertainment fans, each vulnerable to bonding with different stories (cf. Rein 2006, pp. 126). Another process that make celebrities is the cultivation of “magic” by partly asserting and reinforcing the celebrities’ power through the performance of various tricks and undertakings. And, as Milicia (2009) would observe, the magical in Hanks is precisely how he throughout the years transformed himself “from moderately successful television sitcom co-star to one of America’s most beloved actors.” For one, it is indeed enchanting that Hanks is able to portrait a wide array of personalities on screen. Although he was less a comedian, he can be comic as he has this wry sensibility that makes him effectively do comic roles. He was as effectively dramatic in the 1988 film Punchline, where for instance he did the comic-pathetic “Singin’ in the Rain” number. He was also very effective in conveying the character’s overwhelming terror, determination to achieve justice, sardonic bitterness and idealistic love for the law in Philadelphia where he played the role of an AIDS-afflicted-gay-lawyer. His versatility as an actor – which is posited as breathtaking in itself – is even complemented by the narratives – or propaganda? – that his retinue would feed the press. Understandably, celebrities are frequently required to perform remarkable feats on screen or, at least, in the making of the film (see Redmond & Holmes 2007, pp. 176). We may take as an instance an interview to Hanks relative to his film Cast Away (see Tom Casts His Magic Again [n.d.]). He told about how he needed to lose fifty-five pounds (55 lbs.) for the role, spent weeks up to his neck in water, and caught a serious infection that would have him dead in five weeks. He also shared how hard it was for him not to say anything, hear anything or read anything as silence is not in his personality. This, and other staged celebrities’ appearance before or contact with their fans, actually enhance an aura of magic that surrounds the celebrity (Redmond & Holmes 2007, pp. 177). The third process which produces celebrities is immortalization (Redmond & Holmes, 2007, pp. 177). Through this process, the celebrities’ honorific status is made to transcend beyond physical death. Obviously, this is made possible by mass communications. Film footages and sound recordings, for instance, preserve the celebrity in the public sphere – which is made even more effective by the current Internet video sharing sites. Grauman’s Chinese Theater in Hollywood has the imprints of Hanks’ footprints on its cement. And numerous websites contain photos, action figures, posters, and signed memorabilias by Hanks. Compendium This paper delves into the issue of fame and celebrity, and takes the versatile Tom Hanks as an instance. At the outset of this paper, it was attempted to draw the line of distinction between being famous and being celebrity. As in the case of Hanks, he is both enjoying fame and the status of being a celebrity. It was also pointed out that personal celebrities, like Hanks, is a social construction. And, as such, the social constructs are “made” following (psychological or sociological) processes – which change, too, in time. Now, this paper won’t be complete should the fact that fame and celebrity-status – like power, wealth, and prestige -- actually keep societies unequal is not brought to the fore. This inequality may be betrayed by, first and foremost, how the rate of person’s proffesional or other characteristics are valued by the society – that is why Hanks’s movies are box office hits. Too, Hanks holds advantage over against other entertainers by the breadth of renown and a high level of reputation that he holds considering his place and social strata. This is the reason Hanks is numbered 39th and 57th in Forbes.com and Times.com lists of top celebrities and most influential personalities, respectively. Further, observably, Hanks is also conventionally engaged to exceptional, and not just with the “common,” actors. He’s associated only with Tom Cruise in terms of biggest box office drawer, or with the likes of Sean Penn, Spencer Tracy or Marlon Brando in terms of Oscar winners. Finally, while other entertainers come and go, Hanks is assured of being not forgotten. He’s expected to transcend the limits of mortality, because he’s famous and a celebrity. References: Bauman, Z., 2005. Liquid life. Cambridge: Polity Press. Boorstin, D.J., 1961. The image: A guide to pseudo-events in America. New York: Vintage. Forbes.com, 2009. #39 Tom Hanks – The 2009 celebrity 100. [Online] Available at: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/53/celebrity-09_Tom-Hanks_WG9O.html [Accessed 22 October 2009]. Gabler, N., (n.d.). Toward a new definition of celebrity. [Online]. Available at: http://www.learcenter.org/images/event_uploads/Gabler.pdf [Accessed 20 October 2009]. Gamson, J., 1994. Claims to fame: celebrity in contemporary America. Berkeley: University of California Press. Giles, D., 2000. Illusions of immortality: A psychology of fame and celebrity. New York: St. Martin’s Press, Inc. Grinin, L., 2009. People of celebrity as a new social stratum and elite. In L.E. Grinin & A.V. Korotayev, eds. Hierarchy and power in the history of civilization: Cultural dimensions. Moscow: Krasand, pp. 183-206. Milicia, J., 2009. Hanks, Tom. [Online]. Available at: http://www.filmreference.com/Actors-and-Actresses-Ga-Ha/Hanks-Tom.html [Accessed 20 October 2009]. Pace, F., (n.d.). Celebrity: Don’t confuse it with fame. [Online]. Available at: http://www.hofmag.com/content/view/82/30/1/0/ [Accessed 22 October 2009]. Redmond, S. & Holmes, S., 2007. Stardom and celebrity: A reader. London: Sage Publications, Inc. Rein, I. et al., 2006. High visibility: Transforming your personal and professional brand. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Rojek, C., 2001. Celebrity. London: Reaktion Books, Ltd. Time.com, 2009. The 2009 Time 100. [Online]. Available at: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1894410_1893836_1893832,00.html [Accessed 23 October 2009]. Tom casts his magic again, (n.d.). Available at: http://www.tiscali.co.uk/entertainment/film/interviews/tom_hanks.html [Accessed 20 October 2009]. Tom Hanks, 2009. [Online]. Available at: http://www.destinationhollywood.com/celebrities/tomhanks/funfeatures_content.shtml [Accessed 22 October 2009]. Read More