I think this is a great post, and I’ve been sort of interested in the phenomenon of Hilton since I guiltily watched all of The Simple Life one evening, enjoying it for the exact quality you highlight, Paris’ almost lovable doofiness? I think that explains how, as “tainted” as she’s made herself, she still remains so less tarnished in the public eye than those she’s been the downfall of (Richie, Spears, and Lohan…).

But I hesitate on this word “tainted” and in fact, appreciate the way you sort of skirt the issue of “judging Paris” as I’ve read a number of interesting things on livejournal about how Paris’ public treatment is really just symptomatic desire to judge women. I wish I could link the first post, but it’s locked, so although you can’t read any of the commentary, here’s the main text:

sometimes i feel bad for paris hilton. not because she’s innocent or not a brat or whatever, but she is the logical conclusion of the american dream. that’s what you wanted, isn’t it? isn’t she what we wanted? blonde, skinny, rich, above the law, “cool” (aka uncaring, disrespectful, as per the original incarnation of the “cool” concept), slutty, someone we both emulate and admonish. she’s so bad, we can’t wait to get more of her bad. she’s too skinny, that anorexic bitch. she put on five pounds, i bet she’s pregnant, the slut. this is what we wanted, right? let the abyss look back into you, america. the mainstream public–how dare they feel above her. she’s what they demanded, she’s like a golem they created to pillory. that’s why i feel kind of “poor thing” about it. you put a regular american human in that setting and it’s got nowhere else to grow. there’s a particular cruelty to the hatred of her that i think goes beyond her being stupid, spoiled, arrogant, racist, etc., and thinking she’s outside the law; this is absolutely also a feminist issue. when robert downey jr was fucking up, we wanted him punished, but without the gleeful voyeurism we feel now; she’s a double transgressor because she breaks laws AND she’s a woman (acting like colin farrell makes him a playboy hero, her a slut; and so forth, down all of her faults). it feels a bit like the video of the iraqi girl being stoned to death. it feels bad.

i think she belongs in jail because i want people who break the law or social contract to be punished, and people who abide by the law/social contract to be rewarded (consensual crimes exempt–but you know what i mean) (this brings up a whole other host of angry potential posting on jail/laws that i can’t even bring myself to post, since this isn’t a good weekend for a Classic LJ Shitstorm. but yeah). but this isn’t about jail anymore, is it. this is about a large body of people who would probably scalp tickets to her public hanging, her witch trial. how disgusting we all are.

A post which included a link to this article: http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2006/12/11/paris_hilton/index.html that I think gets it partly right, especially when it says…

In some ways, Hilton’s presence on the celebrity scene is troubling because of the suspicion that she is a straw woman for all those who like to think of young women as dumb floozies. We keep her there, as a mortifying symbol of American womanhood — yes, she is famous overseas — in part because she is a satisfying punching bag for anyone with women issues. This year Keith Olbermann felt free to call Hilton a slut on air and speculate about whether anyone had ever ejaculated in her face. One of her former conquests, Elijah Blue Allman, has said that he used Tilex to clean his genitalia after their unprotected encounter. As Hymowitz observed in her piece, “slurs like ‘tramp,’ ‘tart,’ ’slut,’ ’skank,’ and ’skanktron’ have suddenly become acceptable again, as long as Paris is their target.” Indeed. Unable to choose between politically incorrect punch lines, the New York Post recently ran a photo of Hilton, Spears, and Lindsay Lohan under the cover headline “Bimbo Summit” and the inside headline “3 Bimbos of the Apocalypse”; the piece concluded with the sentence, “Skanks for the memories!” And it was funny! Which is part of what is so dangerous about our attentions to Hilton. It’s easy to suspect that it is because she offers gratifyingly inappropriate opportunities to lash out against femininity and sexuality (outbursts to which few object, because there is literally no one who wants to defend her) that she has remained famous at all.

Although as mentioned in my lj friend’s post where I discovered the article, the writer ends up lashing out against feminity as well.

Here’s a really well-written and straightforwad lj post on the issue as well, http://pdanielson.livejournal.com/181618.html

Hope you enjoy.