Photos
Tony Blair
- Self
- (archive footage)
Richard Branson
- Self
- (archive footage)
Princess Diana
- Self
- (archive footage)
Storyline
Featured review
"The word fan derives from fanatic" – Hitchslap for the tabloid-culture
There is a saying that people who have been around during the JFK-assassination distinctly remember what they did or where they were when President Kennedy was shot.
I distinctly recall that mourning of the 01. September 1997: Visiting my parents, I was awoken by my mother and told to turn the TV on. What on earth had happened, I wondered, that was so important that I would have to turn on the TV 7 o'clock in the morning? Did somebody accidentally launch a nuclear missile? Had a tsunami struck somewhere? Had aliens finally made first contact? Well, if you were around that time, you'll surely remember the date. Diana Spencer, former Princess of Whales had died in a car accident in Paris the day before.
My first reaction was that I felt sorry for her sons (as I'd feel sorry for any son who looses his mother). The second reaction: Why on earth would I care? I don't read tabloids. I don't watch the Academy Awards ©. I don't care whether Justin Bieber (note, in case you're reading this in 2016: he was a popular YouTube-singer) has been caught DUI or is pregnant. And I'm not even British. Yet, I couldn't help watching the "Breaking News" on TV – nor did I have much of a choice, since nothing else was broad-casted that week. What else happened between 31st August and the 7th of September? I'm sure: a lot I'm sure; a military junta could have taken over the White House and we would never have heard about it. There was just too much live footage of a mob of grieving house-wives parading in front of Buckingham palace and laying down an ocean of flowers, slowly spiraling down into hysteria. Then everybody who had ever seen a camera gave their 2-cents on the matter on CNN and BBC (I believe, Tom Cruise, Madonna and Steven Spielberg, amongst others); Queen Elisabeth II. was virtually forced by public pressure to give a statement and then, of course, the funeral; re-broadcast over and over again (I can still sing along to "Goodbye, Norma Jean", pardon, "Candle in the Wind" to this day, despite neither being a fan of Elton John nor liking the song very much).
In "Diana: The Mourning After" Christopher Hitchens tries to investigate how the media created a "national experience" – a Woodstock-of-Mourning, if you want. And how opportunistic politicians like Tony Blair and hanger-ons used that event for their own points and purposes. Hitchens wonders what warranted this experience. The answer is typically Hitchens, precise, logic and down to the point: not much. The essential answer was much more trivial, if not vulgar: People mourning, not because they have lost somebody near and dear or because the world lost somebody who had a great impact on world-history (we all knew AIDS and land-mines existed long before Diana), but that the tabloids would be a little emptier after Diana's passing.
Years later the news broad-casted that Kim-Jong-Il, president of North-Korea, had passed away and showed footage of "mourners" in Pyongyang - pardon me, I cannot recall the exact date, but I distinctly remember what I thought during that time: "It is as if Diana Spencer had died all over again".
One of the interviewees pointed out, that the world would grief very much about a person who has "actually made a huge difference in the world" and points out Nelson Mandela. 16 years have gone by since then and Nelson Mandela has passed away a few months ago. Compare the amount of media-coverage and decide for yourself.
8/10 (for the documentary, that is)
I distinctly recall that mourning of the 01. September 1997: Visiting my parents, I was awoken by my mother and told to turn the TV on. What on earth had happened, I wondered, that was so important that I would have to turn on the TV 7 o'clock in the morning? Did somebody accidentally launch a nuclear missile? Had a tsunami struck somewhere? Had aliens finally made first contact? Well, if you were around that time, you'll surely remember the date. Diana Spencer, former Princess of Whales had died in a car accident in Paris the day before.
My first reaction was that I felt sorry for her sons (as I'd feel sorry for any son who looses his mother). The second reaction: Why on earth would I care? I don't read tabloids. I don't watch the Academy Awards ©. I don't care whether Justin Bieber (note, in case you're reading this in 2016: he was a popular YouTube-singer) has been caught DUI or is pregnant. And I'm not even British. Yet, I couldn't help watching the "Breaking News" on TV – nor did I have much of a choice, since nothing else was broad-casted that week. What else happened between 31st August and the 7th of September? I'm sure: a lot I'm sure; a military junta could have taken over the White House and we would never have heard about it. There was just too much live footage of a mob of grieving house-wives parading in front of Buckingham palace and laying down an ocean of flowers, slowly spiraling down into hysteria. Then everybody who had ever seen a camera gave their 2-cents on the matter on CNN and BBC (I believe, Tom Cruise, Madonna and Steven Spielberg, amongst others); Queen Elisabeth II. was virtually forced by public pressure to give a statement and then, of course, the funeral; re-broadcast over and over again (I can still sing along to "Goodbye, Norma Jean", pardon, "Candle in the Wind" to this day, despite neither being a fan of Elton John nor liking the song very much).
In "Diana: The Mourning After" Christopher Hitchens tries to investigate how the media created a "national experience" – a Woodstock-of-Mourning, if you want. And how opportunistic politicians like Tony Blair and hanger-ons used that event for their own points and purposes. Hitchens wonders what warranted this experience. The answer is typically Hitchens, precise, logic and down to the point: not much. The essential answer was much more trivial, if not vulgar: People mourning, not because they have lost somebody near and dear or because the world lost somebody who had a great impact on world-history (we all knew AIDS and land-mines existed long before Diana), but that the tabloids would be a little emptier after Diana's passing.
Years later the news broad-casted that Kim-Jong-Il, president of North-Korea, had passed away and showed footage of "mourners" in Pyongyang - pardon me, I cannot recall the exact date, but I distinctly remember what I thought during that time: "It is as if Diana Spencer had died all over again".
One of the interviewees pointed out, that the world would grief very much about a person who has "actually made a huge difference in the world" and points out Nelson Mandela. 16 years have gone by since then and Nelson Mandela has passed away a few months ago. Compare the amount of media-coverage and decide for yourself.
8/10 (for the documentary, that is)
helpful•30
- t_atzmueller
- Jan 29, 2014
Details
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content