Whenever a person of note passed, people immediately begin looking for the Three. The rule of thumb is that whenever one famous person passes two more are usually right behind them. More often than not, it does seem to be true.
Or does it?
Here at DNA, we were all upset by the loss of Sir Christopher Lee. Some of us were more upset than others by the passing of "The American Dream" Dusty Rhodes. We were immediately checking in on our other favorite celebrities to make sure that they were still among the living. Even as we were looking for the third member of the Three, there was some debate about whether or not we even had two members yet.
Who actually gets to decide The Three?
People who aren't into movies or younger people who haven't seen the Lord of the Rings or the most recent Star Wars movies might not even know who Christopher Lee was. Those that didn't follow professional wrestling primarily in the 80's and 90's most likely aren't that familiar with Dusty Rhodes and didn't find themselves affected by his death. Someone I used to work with was greatly upset by the passing of Ornette Coleman, a jazz musician pioneer who I had never even heard of.
There's been more than 100 deaths of people that were prominent enough for Wikipedia to note just in the month of June. Why are any of these other people less worthy than anyone else? Scientists, singers, actors, and athletes have all departed to the afterlife in just the last 12 days.
Are they any less worthy of being mourned than anyone else? Why is Christopher Lee more important than Dame Anne Warburton who was a college president, ambassador and representative to the UN? In the big world picture, Lee probably wasn't as important but that's how at least American society seems to be this day in age. Pop culture rules all.
So keep that in mind next time a big name dies. Just because you haven't found your Three doesn't mean someone else isn't already mourning theirs.
No comments:
Post a Comment