Michelle Malkin
and friends explode in mockery over Katy Perry (a singer) seeming to suggest
"no borders" and "co-existence" as answer to terrorism.
"No!" shriek KP fans. "Listen to the whole interview!" I
did. She was mostly incoherent about "fanbases" uniting and not being
nasty to each other on Twitter-- I think-- but it was in response to a question
about the bombing of an Ariana Grande (another singer) concert in England. So,
MM was maybe too quick to ridicule, but it wasn't all that far-fetched, given
the context and KP's use of heavily-loaded terms like "no borders"
and "co-exist." Verdict: both wrong.
Meanwhile, some
are lambasting Ariana (the singer) for failing to dash to the hospital to
comfort injured fans while condemning Islamist terrorism. Why does anyone think she
would have anything useful to say beyond "This is horrible"? And are patients and their families sitting
there asking "Where the heck is Ariana?" And just why, exactly, does
anyone look for cogent political, religious or sociological analysis from
people who sing and prance around in odd costumes for a living? And why do such
people keep trying to give it?
Mean-meanwhile,
others berate Demi Lovato (a singer), who was accused of the sin of
"cultural appropriation" for wearing her hair in dreadlocks, only
they weren't dreadlocks, but they're still mad at her for failing to thrash
herself with sharp barrettes over the very possibility that she might have ever
even allowed the notion of dreadlocks to enter her fashionable head, and of
course she wouldn't because that would be just intolerable. My head hurts.
Maybe my cornrows are too tight. Anyway, a disillusioned fan illustrated what
the problem is with all of this. He said Demi's flippant response was rude to
"fans that rely on you to provide them an up-lifting attitude to the
world." Good grief, lad, she's a performer. Provide your own attitude.
I recall really liking the Moody Blues. Eric Clapton. Smokey Robinson, both the Beatles and the Stones (there were militant camps back then). I might
have nodded sagely to Buffalo Springfield and "There's somethin' happenin'
here; what it is ain't exactly clear..." They could be
pretty deep, man. But relying on any of them for anything more than cool music
would have been dumb.
It was also dumb for people to burn piles of Beatle records
(those flat, round, vinyl things) after John Lennon said, "We're more
popular than Jesus." At the time, I thought I got his point. Teenyboppers
were much more likely to scream and proclaim their adoration at Beatle concerts
than at church. He wasn’t claiming to be better or more important than Jesus… but
he probably shouldn't have said it. And certainly no one should ask.