Skip to main content

KP: Celebrity, Narcissist or Nihilst?

The fact that I am even writing about the latest tirade from Kevin Pieterson arguably grants him his wish. As Oscar Wilde said in the "Importance of Being Earnest", there is only one thing worse than being talked about - not being talked about. Thus was born the modern age with it's unpleasant celebrity culture.

It is a peculiar trait of modern life that autobiographies are now written before a life has been properly lived out. But that is legacy of nihilism most notably predicted by Nietszche in his groundbreaking book "Beyond good and evil". In his 1882 book "The gay science" Nietszche announces that "God is dead, God remains dead and we have killed him". Nietszche was one of the greatest philosophers of any era and his predictions have reached their fruition to the letter.

God in the sense that Nietszche meant may well have been largely killed. But he also predicted that the old God would be replaced by new ones in which the primary goal was the pursuit of pleasure while old values such as morals were dispensed with. That we find ourselves immersed in the age of celebrity is borne out by me even writing this. The fact that I don't recognise Pieterson as a celebrity misses the point. The entire foundation of celebrity is based on recognition and garnering attention irrespective of it being positive or negative.

As Pieterson launched in to his latest gripe with his erstwhile team-mates, he did so knowing that his somewhat premature autobiography is about to go on sale. And so it goes on. When I look back to the cricketers of my youth, narcissism was thankfully rare so stuck out like a sore thumb when it reared it's ugly head. Botham famously had his hair tinted with blonde streaks after serving a ban for drug-taking. As statements go, it was about as provocative and nihilistic as we could possibly imagine: "You may have banned me from playing but you need me more than I need you and we both know it so I've even dyed my hair to accentuate the point".

Quite what Pieterson hopes to achieve with his latest outburst is a bit of a mystery. Team sport at the highest level is fraught with large egos and big personalities. Being able to accept abuse is just as important as being able to dispense it. That doesn't make it right of course. Before the professional era was augured in between the wars, it would have impossible to imagine this sort of public spat taking place. For one thing, it was not the done thing in a society still held tightly within the established class divisions. Since then of course, class division has become progressively less obvious, and to many people, less relevant. Class of course was one of the very values to which Nietszche referred when he predicted the age of the nihilists.

If the cricket side of the argument is even to be considered, I can't even see what the arguments are. During the course of the Ashes series in Australia, Pieterson was dismissed as a result of playing so many irresponsible shots without a care in the world. Putting aside the world around him, these were not the shots of a man who valued his team-mates either. It is so predictable in today's world to hear someone like Pieterson explain this away by insisting that this is the way he plays. Well, if that really is the way he plays, there is no doubt in my mind that England are far better served without him. He is clearly a luxury they can ill afford.

If you go to a great restaurant for twenty meals have nineteen excellent meals, you will seldom remember the nineteen if the other one was a bad one. So too it is with batting. You only get one chance and then you're out. As Geoffrey Boycott is so fond of saying, "You're no good to the team when you're back in the pavilion bemoaning your luck". It would be hard to imagine the batting greats giving their wicket away so cheaply to so many loose shots. the Legend of players like Bradman, Hammond, Hobbs, Sutcliffe and others is borne out of the extent to which their wickets became so prized. Their predecessors were men like C.B.Fry and Ranji. These were true greats of the game but it would have been unthinkable to hear them publicly criticising their team mates in the manner we have seen this week.

Dressing rooms are not always places for the faint hearted or the easily offended. Cricket is no different to any other game. It is clear that Pieterson's tirade this week has been the last words of a man still smarting from the harsh realities of professional team sport. He has had his chances and with every word this week, he has just rammed the comeback door more firmly in to it's tight fitting frame. It is all well and good to bat like a cavalier but those who live by the sword die by the sword.

Fixated entirely on himself, Pieterson is just another in a long line of narcissists plying their trade in the age of celebrity and nihilism. Today's news will wrap the fish and chips of tomorrow because today's news was never news in the first place.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Tony Blair - Not fade away?

Notwithstanding the current involvement of Gordon Brown in the current political debate surrounding the Scottish Referendum vote, it is customary for former prime ministers of the United Kingdom to fade gracefully in to the background and make way for the new breed. Margaret Thatcher, Edward Heath, Jim Callaghan and Harold Wilson all achieved this simple task without too much fuss. John Major occasionally interjects with an opinion but usually long after the boat has left the harbour. Tony Blair alone seems quite oblivious to this unspoken rule of British political life. An eleventh year leading the country was quite enough for Lady Thatcher when her party dispensed with her services. It seems that Tony Blair can't get enough of power. He is beginning to come across as one of those computer viruses which just won't go away once it has been granted access. We begin to rue the day we ever clicked the "yes" button. The virus invades our entire system and seems ubiquito...

Labour Leadership hopefuls thwarted by Socialist!

When Yvette Cooper today called for UK councils to each take a quota of Syrian refugees, it illustrated the pitfalls of political ambition. As is the custom for the modern breed of politician, she first went to Oxford to study politics, philosophy and economics in which she gained a first class honours degree. The daughter of the former leader of the Prospect union, she left Oxford to gain further qualifications at Harvard and the London School of Economics respectively. Then it was time to gain employment in the real world. Her first job in 1990 was as a policy researcher for the then Labour leader John Smith. By 1992, she had left these shores to help Bill Clinton with his presidential campaign. Any chances of real experience of the real world were dashed when she came back to become a policy advisor to Harriet Harman. This was followed by a role working as a research associate at the Centre for Economic Performance. By 1995, she had progressed to become Chief Economic Correspond...

Extremely Worrying

Clearly worried about the recent levels of attention being paid to him, Richard Dawkins has just surpassed himself in an attempt to regain the spotlight. He has now turned his attention to fairy tales and warned of the danger of inflicting them on children because they “inculcate a view of the world which includes supernaturalism”. He urges us to promote a sense of scepticism in our children presumably so that they can become more like him. I was listening to a radio show yesterday in which a man phoned in to explain the difference between a doubting Thomas and a sceptic. A doubting Thomas will believe what you are saying if you can just show him an example for him to see with his own eyes whereas a sceptic is someone who still won’t believe you even when you have shown him. Dawkins sits firmly in the camp of the latter. For a seemingly educated man, his comments do him no credit. This is the same man whose considerable imagination has led to him proposing highly provocative theor...