Without a television (by choice), I tend not to keep up to date on the latest society/celebrity poop. So after reading a comment about Paris Hilton on some article I read about semantic analysis, I got confused. (The article mentioned that if you really want to stay in the Hilton in Paris, typing “Paris Hilton” into Google won’t get you the relevant link very easily.)
So why should I care about this woman? Well, my reaction is neatly summed up by a Mr. Fred Topel, about.com’s guide to action-adventure. His Paris Hilton essay tells it like it is:
- “I think all rich people have sex in a daze, whether theyâ€™re on drugs, or just naturally out of it. They have no worries of responsibility, so why should they be aware of what their bodies are doing?
- “I happen to prefer brunettes, but even the blondes that are awe-inspiring â€“ the Uma Thurmans, the Kate Bosworths, the Cameron Diazes, the Reese Witherspoons â€“ have some unique look about them. Umaâ€™s nose, Kateâ€™s cheeks, Cameronâ€™s smile, Reeseâ€™s overall cuteness. Paris Hilton is really just your average blonde.
- “Then thereâ€™s The Simple Life, the ridiculous high-concept reality series made before Paris Hiltonâ€™s infamy, that has benefited greatly from her sudden pornographic notoriety. Who really cares about seeing two rich brats forced to do manual labor? [ed: From reading the episode guide on FOX’s website, it sounds 100% staged. Even rich brats know better than to do some of the things mentioned. They were either told to “act up” or it was scripted from back to front.]
- “I guess the most baffling thing to me is that weâ€™re so interested in someone whoâ€™s never done anything. Even models do that somewhat. Paris Hilton has done nothing but be someoneâ€™s daughter. If she werenâ€™t thin and blonde, would anyone still care?”
From anyone who’s seen it, is the 2½ minute tape worth seeing? It sure sounds like it isn’t.