Comments on: Celebrity Doppelgängers, Vanity Fair’s “New Hollywood” issue, and Visibility

By: Josh Shepperd

Josh Shepperd — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 02:03:49 +0000

I think you’ve got a basis for a publishable paper topic here, Megan.

By: sarah jedd

sarah jedd — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:11:51 +0000

I agree with you, Erin– I also looked for some key identifying features. I went with Dora the Explorer (not oddly sexy new tween Dora, the regular preschool Dora) because we share the EXACT SAME HAIRCUT.

But about the “beautiful people” notion: that’s also why I chose Dora, to make fun of all of my Facebook friends who chose congratulatory gorgeous doppelgangers without, it seemed, any trace of self deprecation. Ultimately, this was the most annoying Facebook meme since the bra color one.

By: Claire

Claire — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 05:46:51 +0000

According to myheritage.com, my doppelganger is Bela Lugosi. Not that I’m complaining, but wow.

By: Jeffrey Jones

Jeffrey Jones — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 03:03:43 +0000

Wonderful post

By: mar

mar — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:10:39 +0000

hollywood is not diverse. i’m white and i had a hard time finding someone to be my doppelganger only because i have curly hair. however, celebrity should not be reduced just to hollywood… not only is there an independent movie circuit but also movie/music/literary industries outside the u.s. maybe this shows how prevalent and internalized cultural imperialism is.

By: Annie Petersen

Annie Petersen — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:40:29 +0000

I really appreciate the introduction of race into the examination of the celebrity doppleganger phenomenon. I recently blogged about it in the context of star studies — and the way that most of the stars chosen are not *huge* stars, but rather “normal” or average looking. You can find my post here: http://bit.ly/d3seAU

By: Mary Beltran

Mary Beltran — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:22:14 +0000

Really interesting post, Megan, and I appreciate that you call our attention to the Vanity Fair cover as well. I followed some of the comments online responding to it and was struck by the number and vehemence of writers who defended the cover’s lack of racial diversity. Several wrote that blacks and Latinos had “their” stars, so what was wrong with Vanity Fair presenting “their” (white) stars? It was a bit chilling, that these writers apparently felt Vanity Fair, the Hollywood film industry, and the rest of the mainstream media belonged to and should focus squarely on white America. While of course these writers are not representative of all Americans or even Vanity Fair readers, this comes as a reminder that this sort of thinking isn’t confined to folks in more low-brow chat rooms. I agree, that we should pay attention.

By: Erin Copple Smith

Erin Copple Smith — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:02:53 +0000

This is a great point, Jonathan. One reason I didn’t participate is because in heavier days (and when she was more beloved and less ridiculed figure), folks really did say I looked like Rosie O’Donnell. But I knew that if I put up Rosie’s picture, it would suggest I was fishing for compliments. (“Oh, Erin! You do NOT look like Rosie O’Donnell!” etc.) Indeed, a FB friend who did use Rosie’s picture got those kinds of responses to her choice.

Ultimately, it leaves us looking for a few key identifying features (with short dark hair and dark-rimmed glasses, I figured the safest bet would be Tina Fey, although we don’t really share any other similarities).

All of this to say…yes. This meme seems to be bringing up a great deal of problems w/r/t celebrities and societal norms.

By: Christopher Cwynar

Christopher Cwynar — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:27:26 +0000

This is an excellent – and timely – post. I particularly like the final paragraph in which you incisively break down the manner in which often-discriminatory norms and values are subtly re-inscribed through ‘banal and ostensibly non-political cultural practices”. This is a matter that demands our critical attention, particularly in terms of the manner in which these practices are evolving in the virtual realm. As we increasingly turn to interactive web 2.0 platforms for community, information, and entertainment, we need to be attentive to the ways in which these developments are occurring. Commentators are quick to identify questionable depictions as they emerge in mainstream media venues such as ‘Vanity Fair’, but I think that it may be more difficult to identify these things as they emerge in our Facebook or Twitter feeds. This may be because these sites are forums for more ‘banal’ forms of communication, but it may also be because the information that coalesces on these platforms generally represents one’s friends and acquaintances. As such, one’s newsfeed is to a certain degree a reflection of oneself, and I would posit that this may cause users (sub)consciously massage the information they find there into palatable forms (even if that just means disregarding things that may register as questionable).

The other point here is that these memes are quite ephemeral. The doppelganger game emerged, flourished, and was gone in a week. Now, one finds only doppel-traces in the form of a few lingering profile pics, erstwhile profile pics hidden away in albums, and a bit of media coverage (i.e. this blog post). If we want to understand these cultural phenomena, we have to grab them as they touch us and then race on by. I like this post because it asks us to pause and contemplate this meme before it effectively disappears, to be replaced by another similarly short-term phenomenon.

By: Jonathan Gray

Jonathan Gray — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:17:37 +0000

It also struck me as often a way for “beautiful” people to congratulate themselves. Of course there were exceptions, but most of the people I saw with easy doppelgangers were in that situation because they conform to normative ideas of what constitutes “attractive” (and hence find themselves looking like celebs, who more often than not must conform to the same norms).