TOTW: Reverse Hierarchy
Intent is not behavior. One can intend to perform a certain task--intend it really hard--and still not break out of the routine of current behaviors. Changing behaviors is hard. Intent is not.
Celebrity is often discussed as an unfair advantage, a snake oil seller, or perhaps a person who leveraged serendipity at just the right moment, with just the right knowledge. Sure, there are opportunists who produce mediocre content and appear to be stealing attention from those more deserving. But, what if they do deserve it and you just disagree with the outcomes of their work?
Who is this other kind of celebrity that has earned perhaps even unwanted fame?
Anonymity can hardly combat this kind of celebrity, because the anon's work is so good, they are articulate, their execution swift and consistent. This outcome is so rare that attention and reputation catch up fast, and even if they are not identified by name, they can be identified by patterns of words and valued behaviors.
Have you ever experienced having celebrity unconsensually thrust upon you? To do work to satisfy only yourself--learn something perhaps--that others notice, value, and demand more of, or perhaps possess? To work with a team, or perhaps sing in a band, and become the only celebrity among them?
"Othering" can be a sort of reverse-hierarchy, a possessive act of commodifying the behaviors of another. Being a celebrity is not always a choice when large populations of people value your work. Being a fan, biter, or hater however, is, and one's trust and attention are theirs alone to give, because even in a world of interruption we have become experts at ignoring.
If we as anarchists are critical of celebrity, is this all kinds of celebrity--those who have earned such attention, as well as those who have manipulated their circumstances and audience? What exactly is a celebrity, and could it simply be someone valued for doing something more than intending?