I met Prime Minister Stephen Harper yesterday.
That is a great statement, on so many levels. First, it says a lot about us and our celebrityism. It is amazing how people change around celebrities. I know I certainly change around celebrities - a lot more blood flows to my head, my mind races at 1million miles a minute, I think through a dozen different consequence-scenarios to every little thing I say.
As a high school student I was once with a group of peers when we met Stockwell Day and he invited us into his official residence. Needless to say, this was unorthodox behaviour for the leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, even in the pre-9/11 environment. This took place at the height of Day's popularity, just weeks before it all hit the fan for him.
There was one teenager who was with the group who would 48 hours later, in the House of Commons, slip a note which read "Stop hating women and gays, signed all of Canada" into Stockwell Day's desk. But in Day's official residence, Alexander was ENTIRELY a different person. He was grinning like a chimpanzee when he got to meet Stock. He shook Stockwell's hand eagerly and wrapped his arm around Stock in a vice grip. He came up to me and virtually
begged me to take a photo of him with the Leader of the Opposition, and then mail it to him. (I recall very vividly that I DID post him a copy of that photo - I certainly didn't have high-speed internet or a digital camera in March 2001.)
This anecdote, all to illustrate the point that being around celebrities (even minor celebrities - who, outside of Canada's 30 million inhabitants, has heard of Stockwell Day?) changes how people behave, and I can't get over that.
Second, people try way too hard to appear unfazed by celebrity. "I'm not affected by famous people" is phrase that is only used by those who are most affected by famous people. I learned very early to be upfront about my celebrityism - there is no point in pretending to be unaffected by the presence of famous people when I so clearly am.
I think it's because we have this idea that treating people differently because of their status is immoral, and if we admit that we treat celebrities differently than we treat others we will be guilty of a disgustingly inegalitarian rank favouritism. We just can't get out of our heads those high school history classes where the revolutionaries of France are repeatedly praised for the complete impartiality with which they treated the royals, showing no undue deference for their political position, and making decisions solely on their merits.
I certainly don't think there is anything wrong with treating the leader of a country differently, however. We do, after all, live (ostensibly) in a meritocracy, and if Mr. Harper is the
Premier Ministre, he must have done something to deserve his position. Therefore, if we are to judge him entirely on his merits we really
should pay him extra respect because he earned his position through his superior talents.
As I left a BBQ that Stephen Harper was at today I overheard one attendee brag to another that he was not impressed by celebrity, and he had called the man serving chicken 'Stephen', while others had called him 'Prime Minister'. Of course, beginning an anecdote with "I'm not impressed by fame" and then going on to brag about your interactions with a famous person really gives the lie to what you are saying.
Third, our tendency to exaggerate and brag about our brushes with fame. Yes, I did meet Prime Minister Stephen Harper yesterday; my first time meeting Prime Minister Stephen Harper. (I had met Stephen Harper twice in 2004, before he was PM.) But my interaction with him consisted of a handshake and "Dennis Crawford, I'm Nina Grewal's assistant", to which the PM replied, "Oh, good - it's nice to see you" (before he went on the stage) and a "Prime Minister, can we get a photo of just you and Nina?" to which he replied "yes" (after he left the stage). THAT WAS IT. And yet I still found it necessary to tell you that I "met" him. And I'm sure I will tell this story, in its aggrandised form, a number of times in the coming days.
Interesting, isn't it? We are SO affected by celebrity. Any person who is both eminent and imminent changes our actions so profoundly. There is, you may be surprised to discover, a theological explanation for this phenomenon. You see, we were designed to worship a personality. It is in our very nature as humans to want to worship something better than us. Of course, the personality that we are designed to worship is God, but so often we displace that personality with another.
Jeremiah 2:13 says, "for my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns that can hold no water."
We are supposed to worship God - to drink from the fountain of living waters. But instead we often ditch the worship of God for the worship of a vastly inferior substitute. Instead of the fountains of living water, we drink from broken cisterns - worshipping entertainers, political activists, leaders, or athletes. But the worship of these second-rate personalities comes so easily, because worship is very natural for us.
Of course, we easily fool ourselves because we don't use the word "worship". "Oh, I really
admire Madonna." "I really
look up to Wayne Gretzky." "I would
really like to meet Michael Ignatieff." But what is the point in fooling ourselves? It's obviously worship. And here's the kicker - it's nothing to be ashamed of, because it's perfectly natural. You just need to recognise that your natural desire is misdirected, and then take the steps to direct it back to where it belongs - directed toward the only worthy object of worship, the infallible God.
I met Prime Minister Harper yesterday. From all I could ascertain, he is a real swell guy.
