Thread: Celebrities vs. Nobility

My roommate and I were having an interesting conversation about nobility and celebrities last night and this was the choice quote.

Celebrities provide all of the downsides of noblility and none of the benefits.

That seems pretty accurate.

Case by case issue, society has expanded the umbrella it arches over "celebrity".

However men like Ronald reagan turned celebrity into useful platform for great public service.

As did Charleton Heston, Jimmy Stewart and many others.

We are rightfulyl weary of gossip and those that subject themselves to be objects of it, but by and large celebrities rue the day they obtained the status.

As is noted most were not noble before fame and are unfairly expected to be noble simply because they have public attention.

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

Originally Posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

Silence peasant!

Originally Posted by No Longer A Libertine

Originally Posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

Silence peasant!

They will ask silly questions, won't they?

-----Added 1/28/2009 at 08:54:49 EST-----

It is interesting, though, did society benefit from nobility and royalty, or did it not?

Originally Posted by turmeric

It is interesting, though, did society benefit from nobility and royalty, or did it not?

Only a peasant would question such a thing?

Originally Posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

I would think that in theory nobility would have a greater ability to produce and support the arts, literature, music, medical charities, etc. because they do not have a need to work to survive.

That was at least what happened in the past. For example, amost every piece of literature, history, poetry, etc. we have from the Classical Period (Greece and Rome) was produced by nobility.

Also worth noting is that the great Composers of the past all worked at the pleasure of a King or an Emperor or some type of nobility (or even an Archbishop).

no·bil·i·ty (nō-bĭl'ĭ-tē) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. no·bil·i·ties

A class of persons distinguished by high birth or rank and in Great Britain including dukes and duchesses, marquises and marchionesses, earls and countesses, viscounts and viscountesses, and barons and baronesses: "The old English nobility of office made way for the Norman nobility of faith and landed wealth" (Winston S. Churchill).
Noble rank or status: Congress may not grant titles of nobility.
The state or quality of being exalted in character.

[Middle English nobilite, the quality of being noble, from Old French, from Latin nōbilitās, from nōbilis, noble; see noble.]


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

ce·leb·ri·ty (sə-lěb'rĭ-tē) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. ce·leb·ri·ties

A famous person.
Renown; fame.

[Middle English celebrite, fame, from Old French, from Latin celebritās, from celeber, celebr-, famous.]
ce·leb'ri·ty·hood' n.

Synonyms: These nouns refer to a widely known person: a social celebrity; the heroes of science; a theatrical luminary; a big name in sports; a notable of the concert stage; a personage in the field of philosophy.


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

If all the celebrities were truly noble, they could do a lot of good.

Originally Posted by No Longer A Libertine

Originally Posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

Silence peasant!

Originally Posted by No Longer A Libertine

Originally Posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

Silence peasant!

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Originally Posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

I would think that in theory nobility would have a greater ability to produce and support the arts, literature, music, medical charities, etc. because they do not have a need to work to survive.

That was at least what happened in the past. For example, amost every piece of literature, history, poetry, etc. we have from the Classical Period (Greece and Rome) was produced by nobility.

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Originally Posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

I would think that in theory nobility would have a greater ability to produce and support the arts, literature, music, medical charities, etc. because they do not have a need to work to survive.

That was at least what happened in the past. For example, amost every piece of literature, history, poetry, etc. we have from the Classical Period (Greece and Rome) was produced by nobility.

At what could be considered an extravagant cost in the welfare of the peasants, though. Was it really worth it?

And secondly, did Jesus call His followers to be exalted or to be humble?

In talking about nobility on this thread, Rev. Winzer made this point about some of their historical responsibilities. The arts have arguably been incredibly impoverished in the western world by the decline of patronage, in addition to the other things.

Diplomacy is hard work. Political machinery is alot like an air conditioner -- many people enjoy the cool environment and have no idea what is taking place beneath the cover.

Every society has elites, and every type of elite has its own problems, but you won't get rid of elites. A member of a landed aristocracy (the nobility) can be "exalted" or "humble" just as any of us can be, whether we have $1,000 in the bank or $10,000,000 or are the richest person in the world.

Nothing about said individual requires or dictates that they opress the poor or that they do by their very existence. Otherwise in our society, Sam Walton and his family have inherently oppressed the poor by the very virtue of making their fortune off a chain of discount merchants that favors the lower incomes. (I don't want to hear about their business practices, this is an example).

I'm not saying nobility was perfect or even inherently a good idea, but I dispute the idea that it only brings a net loss to a nation with those institutions.

Originally Posted by Skyler

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Originally Posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

I would think that in theory nobility would have a greater ability to produce and support the arts, literature, music, medical charities, etc. because they do not have a need to work to survive.

That was at least what happened in the past. For example, amost every piece of literature, history, poetry, etc. we have from the Classical Period (Greece and Rome) was produced by nobility.

At what could be considered an extravagant cost in the welfare of the peasants, though. Was it really worth it?

And secondly, did Jesus call His followers to be exalted or to be humble?

Jonathan,

No one is arguing that life (in a Fallen world) is fair.

But all the same, I'd rather pay Homer to wrote poetry that will last 3000+ years than to pay a complete buffoon like Manny Ramirez to hit a ball, or the latest thug to make three pointers, or Madonna to spout filth.

Also, where would the early church have been if it weren't for some wealthy (elite, culturally, financially, and socially in some cases) members with large homes? Clearly there were problems of favoritism and the like that came from it.

However, due to the nature of sin, you still have the same potential for sin-caused problems in economically level societies as you do in stratfied ones. The problems look different, but there are still problems often at least as bad as the ones eliminated.

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Originally Posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Out of interest what are the benefits of nobility?

I would think that in theory nobility would have a greater ability to produce and support the arts, literature, music, medical charities, etc. because they do not have a need to work to survive.

That was at least what happened in the past. For example, amost every piece of literature, history, poetry, etc. we have from the Classical Period (Greece and Rome) was produced by nobility.

Our queen paints if that counts

Originally Posted by Theoretical

Also, where would the early church have been if it weren't for some wealthy (elite, culturally, financially, and socially in some cases) members with large homes? Clearly there were problems of favoritism and the like that came from it.

However, due to the nature of sin, you still have the same potential for sin-caused problems in economically level societies as you do in stratfied ones. The problems look different, but there are still problems often at least as bad as the ones eliminated.

That's a good point.

Originally Posted by Theoretical

Every society has elites, and every type of elite has its own problems, but you won't get rid of elites. A member of a landed aristocracy (the nobility) can be "exalted" or "humble" just as any of us can be, whether we have $1,000 in the bank or $10,000,000 or are the richest person in the world.

Yes, but when was the last time you saw a humble celebrity?

Originally Posted by fredgetco

Jonathan,

No one is arguing that life (in a Fallen world) is fair.

But all the same, I'd rather pay Homer to wrote poetry that will last 3000+ years than to pay a complete buffoon like Manny Ramirez to hit a ball, or the latest thug to make three pointers, or Madonna to spout filth.

^^Seconded.

Originally Posted by Skyler

Originally Posted by Theoretical

Also, where would the early church have been if it weren't for some wealthy (elite, culturally, financially, and socially in some cases) members with large homes? Clearly there were problems of favoritism and the like that came from it.

However, due to the nature of sin, you still have the same potential for sin-caused problems in economically level societies as you do in stratfied ones. The problems look different, but there are still problems often at least as bad as the ones eliminated.

That's a good point.

Originally Posted by Theoretical

Every society has elites, and every type of elite has its own problems, but you won't get rid of elites. A member of a landed aristocracy (the nobility) can be "exalted" or "humble" just as any of us can be, whether we have $1,000 in the bank or $10,000,000 or are the richest person in the world.

Yes, but when was the last time you saw a humble celebrity?

Originally Posted by fredgetco

Jonathan,

No one is arguing that life (in a Fallen world) is fair.

But all the same, I'd rather pay Homer to wrote poetry that will last 3000+ years than to pay a complete buffoon like Manny Ramirez to hit a ball, or the latest thug to make three pointers, or Madonna to spout filth.

^^Seconded.

Yes, but when was the last time you saw a humble celebrity?

Hence my opening post's quote