It's not just a trend, it's an epidemic of bubonic proportion. It's a plague of oxymoronic non-comformity, of copy-catted repetition. It's a disease manifest in all parts of society. This sickening exhibition of human behavior is what I, and many others, deem "living one's life vicariously through others."
In other words, get a life.
Alas, to avoid being labeled a hypocrite, I must admit that I, too, often live my life vicariously through others.
I watch talk shows, I watch(ed) the Simpson trial, I watch The Real World, I gossip, and I even read the Weekly World News. There's a common thread between all these seemingly unrelated items: they're all based on extraordinary events -Êin other people's lives.
This leads to the crux of the concept of living one's life vicariously through others. It's the idea that since most lives are relatively homeostatic, everyday-Joe, and even mundane, many react to this by seeking to add an exotic or extraordinary element to their own lives. In fact, I propose the following theorem: Because most individuals live an uneventful existence, they seek to maximize the element of exotica in their lives.
Given that accessibility to exotica is a problem in most people's lives, they seek to obtain it from sources other than actual experiences. In other words, people seek experiences from other people's lives to fulfill the voids in their own lives.
This explains the existence of talk shows. It's not as if these shows are actually trying to solve the problems of the world, i.e. stopping Suzy from humping everything in sight, or why Joe is into that body piercing thing. While many talk shows (read: Montel) hide behind the guise of "saving the world from itself," they actally just deliver gossip and a quick fix for the extraordinary. Talk shows provide an element of the exotica that is missing from peoples' lives, in concordance with the theory above.
Enter the Weekly World News. This is a personal favorite of mine. As with talk shows, I claim that the Weekly World News satiates the human desire for exotica. The funny thing about this publication, however, is that it is so far-fetched and obviously false that it's an intellectual crime that anyone can believe what appears on its pages. But believability isn't the issue; in fact, it's a moot point. What people want is just the idea of these falsities - "120 year old man gives birth to raccoon," or "Jimmy Hoffa found in block of ice," or "woman sues husband for poor sex, then wants divorce after he turns into a nympho" are perfect examples, and I'm not even making these up. People (including myself) read this rubbish because they can't, won't, or refuse to experience what they read on the Weekly World News' pages. What they can't experience for myself they have to experience through others.
Consider soap operas -Êbe it teenage ones like 90210 or twenty-something ones like The Real World or housewife ones like The Young and the Restless. In every case, the intended audience is supposed to view each show as "the exciting lives of others." But isn't this the same as escapism? No, because the basic premise of escapism is to flee the problems of one's life, or society, or environment. In the case of soap operas, people watch them for the drama (well, melodrama). People want to experience the ups and downs of relationships in The Young and the Restless; people want to experience the oh-so-tough times of bourgeois teenagers in 90210; People want to experience Puck getting booted out of the pad in The Real World. Once again, we witness peoples' desire to live their lives vicariously through others.
Is this a bad thing? Does it really matter whether an individual cares more about OJ than his own life? Yes and no. While it's sure dandy that media has evolved (devovled?) to a state that provides incredible amounts of information at desire, it's certainly undandy that people scarf up this information without processing it. This leads to a nation of information addicts, living their lives vicariously through others, and hence not giving a rip about their own lives.
This is what is fascinating about the whole thing. Because the people care so much about experiences in others' lives, they neglect their own, and then become the icons they're so addicted to. It's circular. Let me pose this theoretical situation (though I'm sure it's become a reality at some point): Joe Schmoe sits around all day, watching talk shows, flipping to OJ, flipping to soap operas, etc., on the television. Because his life is rather boring, he becomes obsessed with the characters he sees on TV. He even buys a Weekly World News. Eventually, he begins mimicking the characters he lives through vicariously, until at some point he actually begins acting out what he sees others do. For example, he may start becoming a compulsive over-eater, or he may start piercing random parts of his body because he saw it on TV. While the actions this person mimics may or may not be bad, the fact is that he is no longer living his life for the sake of himself. He's living it for the sake of living an extraordinary life - as judged by others.
While the above situation is most certainly extreme, it happens consistently in varying degrees. It's hard to come up with specific examples, but just ask yourself (and consider what other people would say) a few questions: Would you like to be on a talk show? Do you want your "15 minutes of fame" If you answer yes to the questions, as I did, then you might be living your life vicariously through others, and may in fact be altering your actions as a result.
That's OK. Just don't go on a tri-state killing spree, or engage in a shoot-out at your local post office. Like most things, as long as one doesn't live one's life too vicariously through another, then usually things are alright. I mean, come on, we all have to admit that it'd be great to talk to Jenny Jones or Montel in person, or actually be a feature story in the Weekly World News. It might even be neat to live the life of one of those dorks on 90210... I think we all need to get a life. MR