所謂名人

By Holly Grout

In his novel The Picture of Dorian Gray （1891）， Oscar Wilde teased： “There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about， and that is not being talked about.”When he wrote those words， Wilde was at the pinnacle of his fame—and the beginning of a romantic scandal that would make him infamous.1 Frequently disparaged but equally admired for his provocative prose and flamboyant posturing， it is not surprising that Wilde would attract public attention by his controversial love affair with Lord Alfred Douglas and his impassioned courtroom defence of “a love that dare not speak its name”.2 It was not the first time， nor would it be the last， that Wildes larger-than-life personality eclipsed his professional reputation.3 One of the periods most eccentric， charismatic and recognisable figures，4 Wilde experienced fully the privileges and perils of being talked about. That is to say： Wilde knew well the power of celebrity.

現(xiàn)代社會，名人似乎已經(jīng)成為生活中不可或缺的一部分。他們是茶余飯后的談資，是選擇商品的參考，甚至是粉絲們劃分?jǐn)秤训囊罁?jù)。然而，究竟是從何時起，名人成了一種理所當(dāng)然的存在？我們在對名人的仰望和窺伺中，又隱藏著怎樣的期許和情懷呢？

And what is that？ Why do we think of Wilde as a celebrity but not， say， Sir Isaac Newton？ What exactly is celebrity， and when did celebrity as we know it emerge？

Some scholars have located the birth of celebrity in the late-18th and 19th centuries. They have argued that it was this period that not only produced exceptional personalities but also provided the structural conditions necessary for facilitating the development of a fully realised celebrity culture. Reflected in the new field of biography， the pzopularity of portraiture， the proliferation of memoirs， and the appearance of human-interest stories and obituaries in daily newspapers， this period fostered a new concept of the “self” that championed the individual.5 With an expanding public sphere， where more people than ever before could read and take part in the public conversation through the breakdown of entrenched6 political and social hierarchies， any individual （theoretically at least） could aspire to greatness. Ordinary men and women were increasingly aided in this venture7 by technological innovations that stimulated new modes of communication， such as the introduction of largescale print culture and image reproduction， as well as by the forces of industrial capitalism that initiated widespread urbanisation， mechanised work and time， encouraged the commercialisation of leisure， and generated new forms of status.

Famous individuals had long gained recognition within conventional centres of influence such as courts， salons and the ivory towers， and for centuries their likenesses were reproduced in book engravings， in sculpture， on medals and coinage， and in ceramic figurines.8 But these images circulated primarily among the elite， who could afford to purchase and collect them. Mechanised production democratised access to such images. By the late-19th century， anonymous spectators and faceless consumers （as opposed to patrons and close friends） encountered images of the exceptional in newspaper caricatures， on porcelain cameos and inexpensive pocket portraits， on stylised photo cards， and life-sized posters that plastered urban boulevards and decorated major thoroughfares.9

The same urban， mechanised age that threatened to alienate the individual also brought strangers closer to one another than ever before. Not only was it literally easier to be seen—on the streets， in new spaces of leisure10， in the ever-expanding visual culture of photographs and newsprint—it also became easier for individuals to become known. Filtered through the media and often curated11 by the public figure herself， the image was carefully stylised， intended to promote not necessarily the person but the personality. This personality， in turn， became the brand through which the previously unknown individual would become known to larger， even more anonymous publics.

Perhaps no one mastered the phenomenon of creating and publicising 19th-century personalities more effectively than the American showman P. T. Barnum. A clever entrepreneur and shrewd promotions man， Barnum used his museums， circuses and travelling-company productions to launch the careers of newcomers such as the two-foot-tall“General Tom Thumb” and the opera singer Jenny Lind， whom he billed12 as “the Swedish Nightingale”. Rather than focus solely on talent， Barnum exploited Thumbs small stature and showcased Linds sweet temperament and foreignness. He then used the media to transform both performers into international sensations—into celebrities.

Through various forms of mediated representation， audiences gained unprecedented13 access to the secret lives of public figures. This access cultivated the false familiarity between the public figure and her audience that would later become the cornerstone of modern celebrity culture. As public figures became increasingly “known”， through gossip journalism， manufactured publicity and product endorsement14， as well as through the mass circulation of their images and stories， they also became marketable commodities in their own right. In this role， audiences could not only get to “know” a famous person， they could purchase， consume and possess a piece of her as well.

Many scholars have used the point that celebrity requires consumption to argue for its origins in the 20th century. However， all the essential features of celebrity culture were developed in the 19th： look at Barnums promotion of “Lindomania” （predating Beatlemania by about 100 years）， the popularity of collecting and trading portraiture cards， or the celebrity endorsements of a growing number of products， from tea and mustard to cosmetics and hair creams， all accompanied by testimonials and images of recognisable public figures.15 Locating the birth of celebrity in an earlier period marks a significant point of departure from much late-20th-century scholarship that correlated celebrity with cinema， and aligned it with the emergence of the Hollywood star. The 19th century set the stage for modern celebrity； the 20th century， through the mass media， amplified16 celebrity beyond all expectation. Hollywood did not invent celebrity； it simply gave us more of it.

Whereas many megastars seem beyond our reach， some of them seem more authentically like us. The down-to-earth girl next door（Jennifer Aniston or Meg Ryan） or the dependable good guy （Will Smith or Ryan Gosling） make us believe that perhaps we too can possess a certain star quality.17 Through press coverage of their personal lives （from marriage and divorce to success and scandal； from what they eat and where they shop to whom they know） and the commercial distribution of intimate photographs， personal memoirs and sensationalised tabloid exposés we learn that all of these celebrities， no matter how bright their star， are also “just like us”. They are simply ordinary men and women who through luck， grit and circumstance transformed themselves into someone or something special.

In the 21st century， the media offers audiences greater access to information about public figures （increasingly， in real time） thus advertising the celebrity， boosting her visibility and confirming her relevance. The featured celebrity， in turn， generates revenue for media corporations and ensures the viability of websites by increasing the number of “clicks”. Moreover， through the media， the celebrity is packaged as a particular type—a trendsetter， a role model， a rebel， a mirror for the status quo—becoming both a cultural broker and a social force in the process.18 In this role， the celebrity plays simultaneously to collective fantasies and to individual desires， she stimulates the imagination but also invites vicarious identification， she elicits intrigue as an object of curiosity， she courts familiarity despite her distance from her audience， and she reasserts her exceptionalism even as she appears to be just like us.19

Moreover， in the era of reality TV casts， social-media influencers， YouTube personalities， bloggers， vloggers and Instagrammers， it would seem that anyone might become， in Daniel J. Boorstins perhaps prophetic words，20 “known for their knownness”. Indeed， whether we regard ourselves as indifferent publics or eager spectators， by continuing to debate which bodies are worthy—whether by endeavouring to keep up with or preferring to keep away from the Kardashians—we remain entangled in celebritys snare.21 Whether we like it or not， those fascinating， reproducible individuals known， if only for their knownness， continue to give us something to talk about.

But why do we need something or someone to talk about in the first place？ Where does all this talking get us？ What does our fascination with celebrity reveal about how we see ourselves？ Perhaps a celebrity might help us grapple22 with these questions. In her acceptance speech for Best Actress Oscar for the Johnny Cash biopic Walk the Line （2005）， Reese Witherspoon said that shes simply trying to “make work that means something to somebody”.23 Perhaps celebrities matter so much to us because， like Witherspoon， we all want nothing more than to matter.

王爾德在他的小說《多里安·格雷的畫像》中打趣說：“被人議論固然可怕，但更可怕的是無人問津?！痹趯戇@句話的時候，王爾德正如日中天，但不久后，他就將陷入一場桃色丑聞并因此聲名掃地。他的文風(fēng)汪洋恣肆，為人風(fēng)流倜儻，難怪總是既讓人愛，又招人恨。他與道格拉斯勛爵沸沸揚揚的戀情，還有法庭上那場對“不敢言明之愛”的激烈辯護，將他推到了輿論的頂峰也不足為奇了。像這樣的逸事還不止一樁，以至于比起他的文學(xué)成就，王爾德極富傳奇色彩的其人其事更加讓人津津樂道。作為那個時期張揚不羈又極富魅力的名人，王爾德充分感受到了輿論帶來的利與弊。換言之，他最了解名人的力量。

那么，名人究竟為何？為什么王爾德是名人，而牛頓卻很難歸入名人之列？究竟什么是名人？我們所知道的名人這個概念又是何時產(chǎn)生的呢？

有學(xué)者認為，名人的概念誕生于19世紀(jì)晚期至20世紀(jì)。他們認為那是一個個性張揚的時期，創(chuàng)造名人文化的土壤也逐漸成熟。傳記有了新的寫法，肖像攝影開始流行，回憶錄逐漸泛濫，報紙開始登載有人情味的故事和記載生平的訃告——“自我”這個概念形成了，使得個體的旗幟更加高揚。曾經(jīng)根深蒂固的政治社會等級制度土崩瓦解，公共領(lǐng)域迅速擴張，越來越多的人學(xué)會讀書寫字，參與到公共討論中來。甚至可以說，任何人（至少在理論上）都有可能成就一番偉業(yè)。大規(guī)模的印刷、圖像復(fù)制等技術(shù)革新帶來新的傳播方式；而工業(yè)資本主義的興盛，則大大推進了城市化的進程，讓機器進入工作和生活，孕育出休閑娛樂產(chǎn)業(yè)，也刷新了階層的劃分方式。這些都讓平頭百姓也可能天下聞名。

過去名人的知名度依賴宮廷、沙龍和學(xué)術(shù)機構(gòu)這些傳統(tǒng)的影響中心而建立，幾個世紀(jì)以來其形象則靠圖書版畫、雕塑、圖章硬幣和小瓷像傳播。這些物件主要在富人階級中流通，也只有他們才買得起、放得住。而機械化的大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)則使得原本王謝府里才能見到的藏品也飛入了尋常百姓之家。到了19世紀(jì)晚期，報紙上的漫畫、瓷制的浮雕小徽章、廉價的口袋肖像畫、風(fēng)格類似的小卡片，還有街上張貼的大幅海報上，隨處都能看到名人的肖像，它們原本只有名人的資助人、密友可以擁有，如今則被匿名的觀察者和面目不清的消費者所取代。

城鎮(zhèn)化和機械化一方面讓原本親密的人變得疏遠，卻又前所未有地拉近了陌生人間的距離。大街上、新的娛樂場所里，還有逐漸普及的照片和報紙上，隨處都可以見到陌生的面孔，想要名揚四方也容易得多。通過媒體的過濾和公眾人物自身的挑選，這些形象仿佛一張張程式化的臉譜，旨在宣傳的并非是人物本身，而是其身上的某種特質(zhì)。人物特質(zhì)反對來又被打造成一個招牌，招牌之下，曾經(jīng)的無名小輩也能變得家喻戶曉。

20世紀(jì)，炮制和推廣公眾人物是項技術(shù)活，而美國娛樂之王巴納姆或許正是這方面首屈一指的專家。這位創(chuàng)業(yè)家兼公關(guān)大牛，靠著自己創(chuàng)辦的博物館、馬戲團和巡演公司，一手捧紅了侏儒人“拇指湯姆將軍”和女高音林德女士。他還給林德取了個雅號，叫“瑞典夜鶯”。他展出的不僅是二人的才藝，而且還利用侏儒人的身形和林德的甜美性格與異域風(fēng)情大做文章。在他的宣傳運作下，兩人都成了轟動世界的名人。

經(jīng)過媒體全方位、多角度的呈現(xiàn)，觀眾得以一窺公眾人物的私密生活。而這讓公眾人物和觀眾之間形成了一種虛假的熟悉感，這種熟悉感即是培育當(dāng)代名人文化的奠基石。八卦小報、公關(guān)宣傳、產(chǎn)品代言，以及人物形象和軼事的大量曝光，讓公眾人物的知名度逐節(jié)攀升，與此同時他們自身也成了一種可銷售的商品。在這樣的設(shè)定下，觀眾不僅去“認識”一位名人，更可以購買、消費，甚至從某種程度上占有這位名人。

有不少學(xué)者堅稱，名人這個概念產(chǎn)生于20世紀(jì)，因為所謂名人，一定伴隨著消費。但其實，名人文化的所有基本特征在19世紀(jì)就已經(jīng)具備：巴納姆創(chuàng)造出來的林德熱，比披頭士熱約早了一百年；那時候，人人都在收集和買賣名人肖像卡片；名人商品代言也進行得如火如荼，不管是茶葉、芥末，還是化妝品、護發(fā)素，都印著名人的推薦語和頭像。20世紀(jì)末的很多研究，將名人文化歸因于電影行業(yè)的發(fā)展和好萊塢影星的誕生。而將名人的產(chǎn)生時期定義為更早的19世紀(jì)代表著與這一觀點的分野。19世紀(jì)，名人文化的土壤已經(jīng)具備；等到20世紀(jì)，大眾媒介又將名人的效應(yīng)無限放大。因此，名人概念并非來源于好萊塢，而是發(fā)揚于好萊塢。

巨星給人的感覺，有的似乎遙不可及，有的卻又親切無比。像詹妮弗·安妮斯頓和梅格·瑞安這種接地氣的鄰家女孩形象，或者威爾·史密斯和瑞安·高斯林這種靠譜的好男孩形象，讓我們相信自己身上或許也有成為巨星的潛質(zhì)。媒體事無巨細的報道——從結(jié)婚到離異，從成功到丑聞；從每天吃什么，去哪里逛街到跟誰玩得好，還有各種生活照的廣泛傳播、個人回憶錄和八卦報紙上的小道消息，讓我們?nèi)轿坏亓私膺@些名人：名氣再大，也是普通人，不過憑著一點兒運氣、幾分膽識，又趕上了好時候，才聲名鵲起、受人矚目的。

到了21世紀(jì)，媒體對公眾人物的報道更加頻繁，觀眾幾乎可以實時了解公眾人物的行蹤，于是公眾人物的知名度和曝光度愈發(fā)高了，愈發(fā)顯得舉足輕重了。而這些被報道的名人，也為媒體和各大網(wǎng)站帶來了巨大的收益和點擊量。媒體為名人打造各種各樣的人設(shè)—— 有的是時尚達人，有的是行業(yè)模范，有的代表了反叛精神，有的則折射出社會現(xiàn)實—— 也將文化標(biāo)簽和社會意義加于名人身上。在媒體的呈現(xiàn)下，名人既是集體的幻象，也是私欲的化身；他們的生活令人浮想，引人窺伺，與常人相比是那樣遙遠，卻又并無二致。然而在這種相同中，又似乎高人一等。

現(xiàn)在這個時代，真人秀節(jié)目、社交網(wǎng)站、各種視頻網(wǎng)站，哪里都能造出名人。倒真應(yīng)了丹尼爾·小布爾斯廷的那句話，所謂名人，正是“以其知名度而為人所知的人”。而我們呢，不管自認為是冷漠的看客還是積極的追隨者，在支持或者反對卡戴珊之流的時候，就已經(jīng)參與到了這場討論中來。這不正是中了名人的圈套嗎？我們愿意也好，不愿意也罷，這些名人都為我們提供了談資，盡管他們可能千人一面，也可能徒有虛名。

可我們?yōu)槭裁捶且尹c兒談資呢？我們是如何不知不覺沉迷其中的？我們對名人的追求，是否折射了對自己的期待？或許，有一位名人能解答這些問題。里斯·威瑟斯龐憑借2005年的約翰尼·卡什傳記電影《與歌同行》獲得奧斯卡最佳女主角，她在獲獎感言中說，她想做的只是“能觸動一部分人的作品”?；蛟S，名人對我們來說之所以重要，就是因為我們也和威瑟斯龐一樣，想成為能影響他人的人吧。

1. pinnacle： 頂點，頂峰；infamous： 臭名昭著的，聲名狼藉的。

2. disparage： 貶損，貶低；provocative： 引發(fā)思考的，煽動性的；flamboyant： 炫耀的，賣弄的；Lord Alfred Douglas：艾爾弗雷德·道格拉斯勛爵（1870—1945），英國貴族，詩人、作家和翻譯家，也是王爾德的同性情人之一；impassioned： 熱烈的，充滿激情的。

3. larger-than-life： 有英雄（或傳奇）色彩的；eclipse： 使暗淡，湮沒……的重要性。

4. eccentric： 古怪的，異乎尋常的；charismatic： 充滿個人魅力的。

5. portraiture： 肖像繪制，人像攝影；obituary：（報紙上的）訃告；champion：支持，捍衛(wèi)。

6. entrenched： 根深蒂固的。

7. venture： 投機活動，商業(yè)冒險。

8. engraving： 版畫，雕刻；coinage： 硬幣；ceramic figurine： 陶瓷的小塑像。

9. patron： 贊助者，資助人；caricature： 漫畫（藝術(shù)），諷刺畫；cameo： 有側(cè)面頭像浮雕的小徽章；stylised： 風(fēng)格化的，程式化的；boulevard： 大道，大街，后文thoroughfare與之同義。

10. new spaces of leisure： 新的娛樂場所。19世紀(jì)早期，工人每周只有周日能休息一天。到了70年代，開始有每年幾天甚至一周的帶薪假期。90年代，大多數(shù)工人周六下午也能放假，于是有了“周末”（weekend）的概念。隨著休息時間的增多，足球、馬球、拳擊等運動開始興盛，中產(chǎn)階級開始涌入劇院，海邊成了流行的旅游景點，各地都開始修建公園和游樂場。技術(shù)的發(fā)展則使得報紙變得普及，攝影也流行起來。

11. curated： 被精心選擇然后呈現(xiàn)的。

12. bill： （把某人或某事）宣傳為……。

13. unprecedented： 前所未有的，空前的。

14. endorsement： 名人為某商品做廣告，名人代言。

15. mania： 狂熱，熱衷；predate： 早于……存在（或發(fā)生）；mustard：芥末；testimonial： 證明信，推薦書。

16. amplify： 擴大，增強。

17. Jennifer Aniston： 珍妮弗·安妮斯頓（1969— ），《老友記》中瑞秋的飾演者；Meg Ryan： 梅格·瑞安（1961— ），《西雅圖夜未眠》中記者安妮的飾演者；Will Smith： 威爾·史密斯（1968— ），《拳王阿里》中阿里的飾演者；Ryan Gosling： 瑞安·高斯林（1980— ），《愛樂之城》中爵士鋼琴家的飾演者。

18. trendsetter： 引領(lǐng)時尚者；broker： 經(jīng)紀(jì)人，掮客。

19. vicarious： 間接感受到的，間接獲得的；elicit： 引出，探出。

20. Daniel J. Boorstin： 丹尼爾·小布爾斯廷（1914—2004），美國歷史學(xué)家，代表作是《美國人》三部曲；prophetic：預(yù)言的。

21. Kardashians： 卡戴珊家族，紐約知名的名媛家族，在美國體育圈和娛樂圈享有很高的聲望和地位；snare： 陷阱，圈套。

22. grapple with sth.： 盡力解決，設(shè)法對付。

23. Johnny Cash： 約翰尼·卡什（1932—2003），美國鄉(xiāng)村音樂創(chuàng)作歌手，被認為是美國音樂史上最具影響力的音樂家之一；biopic： 傳記片；Reese Witherspoon： 里斯·威瑟斯龐（1976— ），美國演員。