 |
| Photo from Google images. |
Words by George Odysseos
I personally have a soft spot for him. Being the long-haired hippy sort that I am (or try to be), I can appreciate the quirkiness and slight romanticism of his style. He’s not a complete moron either. Not that using big words in an interview makes you clever, as The Spectator has pointed out, but he does seem to possess a certain degree of self-awareness, thanking Mika Brzezinski ‘for the casual objectification’ when the MSNBC hostess referred to him as if he were a (forgive the pun) ‘brand’. But is his latest escapade into the world of politics a step too far?
The first thing we could note is that, depressingly, none of what Brand says is new. The woes of the world is a trumpet that has been played often enough. His appeal seems to lie in the idea that he has cut through the stiff and boring political discourse of the mainstream media and has pursued a no-nonsense approach to the issues that we face today. Looking at his 4,500 word essay in the ‘Russell Brand Issue’ of the New Statesman, there is a sense that he wants to connect with his readers. He admits to having not spared a thought for the misfortune of others in faraway lands and to feeling anger towards banks and bankers only when an ATM charges him to withdraw his money. He’s just a regular guy like us in that sense. But he is also aware of the ‘hypocrisy’ in his pontificating from atop his mountain of fame and fortune ‘like Kubla Khan‘, so does this mean that he has no right to express his opinion?
The apathy of the youth, environmental concerns, the disparity between rich and poor, and our relation to the rest of humanity are things that should concern us all. Brand says that ‘these things are not nonsense’. And he’s right. But is he just another celebrity trying to get those public brownie points? His sharp increase in popularity on the web in the form of memes and the Facebook page ‘Russell Brand for Prime Minister’ (currently at over 120,000 likes) was obviously the effect he and the New Statesman were going for, but should we look at this ploy with disdain? Surely the benefit is that people will actually engage with politics once again, even if it is to express how unhappy they are with it. His appointment as co-editor of the New Statesman for the week was clearly a publicity stunt and his refusal to vote, along with his appeal to others to do the same, was a point Jeremy Paxman would not allow to go unchallenged.
Feature Image: Press “It’s important to find your people. Don’t feel like you have to find this incredible producer or person who’s going to give you loads of money and change your life” says Lauerence Tratalos, one-half of the Northern duo responsible for Misper; a feature debut for director Harry Sheriff and script writer Tratalos….
Featured image and gallery: Lucy Elson-Whittaker Fuel Café Bar in Withington hosts the fifth stop of six-piece band Ignoring Izzy’s ‘Motorway Musk’ tour, following the release of their debut single. The room buzzes with the promise of chaos, and possibly a few flying vegetables. Opening the night is Manchester-based Leucotome, a witch-folk trio blending soft,…
Featured image and gallery: Sub Khan Opening the night, Gabrielle eases the Co-op Live crowd into the spectacular night ahead. There’s no need for spectacle, her presence alone is enough with her deep vocals echoing around the arena. A performance rooted in control and feeling, each song reveals a different shade of her understated command. Operating…
Featured image and gallery: Sam Holmes Formed in Belfast in 2019, Chalk have already made a name for themselves. From support slots for Fontaines D.C., IDLES and Sprints, to taking to the stage at SXSW earlier this year, the band’s growth has been rapid and shows no signs of stopping. Touring their debut album Crystalpunk,…
1 Comment
Cheers for the feedback! I don’t entirely know if I’m for or against either I suppose!
Likewise, I think that something’s got to give. Whether it’s this kind of revolution that’s coming or something worse, I don’t know. Things can’t go on as they are now and I’m obviously hoping for the former! I agree that this things should be re-iterated. Again, and again. However, my issue is that they need to be articulated by people who are going to be taken seriously. Not in the sense of sour-faced seriousness, but I do think there is a bit of a tug-of-war between humour and being taken serious.
Getting a few laughs does something, even if it’s just pointing out the inadequacies in the current state of affairs, but there is a step between laughing at problems and doing something about them.
But I’m just trying to be the Devil’s advocate here. Like I said, I do like Brand and I do think he’s intelligent, but I’m just wondering aloud if he’s the right guy for the job.