He’s the Pope. He was Saying Mass
December 31, 2009, 6:18 pm
Posted by Cathleen Kaveny
on Christmas Eve. He wasn’t being an “exhibitionist.”
Seems like the theory here might need some refining.
Update: It’s wonderful to see that the Pope is treating this incident in a pastoral manner. Nonetheless, I think sending Msgr. Ganswein to visit in the hospital a woman who knocked over the Pope might create some incentives that the Vatican has not fully anticipated.
Surely an outrageous case of blame-the-victim. I followed the Mass on a screen in the Piazza, having passed through a security check. The interruption of the music and movement of the 5 security men down the aisle from the main altar did not convey any cognizance of the incident to the crowd outside. The Pope himself was unaware of what precisely had happened; it seems he was knocked to the ground by the security man fending off the woman. This was the only security man in his immediate vicinity, although there were 50 in the Basilica. Public figures are exposed to danger all the time, and cutting down on perceived flamboyancy is not the answer. More professional security is what’s needed. Perhaps we need a new Marcinkus, or security men disguised as altar boys?
It’s funny. I was sitting about ten rows directly behind the stage when Obama got his honorary degree–I I didn’t actually recognize some of the platform party in their caps and gowns–maybe they were security.
Unfortunately Dottoressa Candella confirms all my unworthy and no doubt stereotypical views of psychoanalysts. But then, in the academic milieu in which I worked, I was sometimes tempted to think that the last true believers in Freud were all in English departments.
As for the suggestion that Obama’s security forces were decked out in caps and gowns — perhaps Professor Kaveny could feed her dean a couple of strong drinks (to celebrate the new year of course) and ask him if it’s true. Se non e vero, e ben trovato.
at the center of the platform at ND, the head of the Secret Service detail was in full academic regalia. When I saw him on TV that day, he looked “security” and I have since seen him, at another Presidential appearance, identified as the head of the detail.
What a bizarre story. I think it may say more about bad journalism than psychoanalysts.
I do think there is an interesting discussion, raised in Bob Imbelli’s papal post on B16′s New Year’s greeting, about the pope in a celebrity culture. He is both a product and agent of that culture–the Vatican very consciously tried to make JP2 into a celeb, and is attempting to do so with B16 (perhaps with less success–less cooperative client).
That can be understandable. But the problem seems to be that everyone wants to be a celebrity–and the only way for us commoners to do so is to brush up against real celebs, either aggressively, like the Italian attackers, or benignly, like the Salahis.
We want fame to be democratic, without wanting to recognize the paradox.
When Eugene Robinson was ordained in NH’s Episcopal diocese, security was there right next to him in vestments. A good idea, actually, for major figures in possible danger.
Yes, Mary, there is that “security” look. It becomes a game to pick them out when numerous presidential candidates appear here. They require us to show both our hands. I only hope there are others nearby in less obvious guise.
“But the problem seems to be that everyone wants to be a celebrity–and the only way for us commoners to do so is to brush up against real celebs, either aggressively, like the Italian attackers, or benignly, like the Salahis.”
Are you willing, on reflection, to stand by this generalization? I for one do not want to be a celebrity and I generally would be inclined not to get near to celebrities, ecclesiastical or other,
Joseph G: Yes, I’d stand by that, in the sense that when I wrote “it seems to be that everyone” I was referring to the broad cultural fascination (obsession?) with reality shows and competitions like American Idol and YouTube exhibitionism. I would personally feel more like you do, but I don’t think you or I represent the zeitgeist. That I would stand by, but am happy to be corrected or argued into another position.
I am not sure I believe in the the concept of Zeitgeist, and I certainly hope there are many more of us who have not been seduced by the attractions of celebrity. But there is something about the madness of crowds. Do you remember Benny Hill’s character Tex Cymbal King of Pop! Or was it Tex Symbol? Be that as it may, celebrity mania is surely a symptom of inner vacuity, which is really sad. I don’t disagree that there is too much of it, but there must be a few sensible people around.