"SCHADENFREUDE"


PATTY CULLITON ([email protected])
Sat, 24 Oct 1998 03:59:21, -0500


Just in case any of the rest of you were wondering what the heck Bono
was talking about when he used the term Schadenfreude in his Clinton
essay - here's an explanatory piece on it. While I don't agree with
it being an almost exclusively "American" thing (I have British
friends who display more Schadenfreude than I ever have!), I think
it's an interesting article.

That damn Bono again - I learned something else new from paying
attention to 'im. :-) In The Name Of Love, Patty
  
SCHADENFREUDE: IT'S ALL-AMERICAN
By Kameron Cole
The Oregon Daily Emerald (U. Oregon)
01/30/98

EUGENE, Ore. -- You've got to hand it to the Germans; they've got a
word for everything. One of the best is schadenfreude, which, loosely
translated, refers to the malicious enjoyment of the misery of others.
 Great, huh? Go ahead, read it again. Better yet, say it aloud.

Now think about what it means.

Schadenfreude may be a German word, but it's a very American concept.
This is, after all, the country that created "America's Funniest Home
Videos," where a man getting hit in the groin with a shovel merits a
belly laugh. And we so voraciously partake of offerings like Fox's
"When Animals Attack" that the network trips over itself in its rush
to issue sequels.

Few of us would admit it, but we've all felt at least a tiny thrill
at the misfortune of someone else. Sometimes it's because we want to
see someone get what's coming to him. Most of the time, we're just
glad it's not us.

Okay, so let's talk about this Clinton thing now.

But not about whether he did or didn't sleep with an intern. Or
whether he did or didn't suborn perjury and obstruct justice. Or
whether or not anyone can say the phrase "President Al Gore" with a
straight face. Instead, let's talk about it as it relates to that
wonderful little German word.

Who would you suppose is deriving the most pleasure from the
president's current political crisis?

One's initial reaction to that question might be to point the finger
at Clinton's political opponents. But while it is not difficult to
conjure up an image of Newt Gingrich and Strom Thurmond sharing mint
juleps and chuckles over "Nightline," they aren't overtly basking in
Clinton's troubles. Actually, the group getting the most jollies at
the president's expense isn't the Republicans -- it's the media.

Like many Americans, I watched the first day of coverage with a
critical eye, listening to the carefully measured words of the
president and his press secretary, and looking for something on their
faces that might betray those words. But I found myself taking more
notice of how much fun the reporters who had descended upon
Washington D.C. seemed to by having. Even the likes of CNN's Wolf
Blitzer, who usually looks like he hasn't had any fun for years, had
a twinkle in his eye.

And while reporters have stopped short of cackling into the camera
while rubbing their hands together in Machiavellian glee, it's still
easy to see that the press hasn't even made the usual half-ass
attempt to disguise its bias in this case.

Sometimes it's been clever, such as Time magazine's declaration that
the president has a passion for "cunning linguistics" in a story that
discusses his alleged belief that oral sex doesn't constitute sex.
And sometimes it's been subtle, like a usually dour "Headline News"
correspondent who grins throughout a report on Clinton's trouble.

While such practices seem benign, they will ultimately serve to
further undermine press credibility in the eyes of the people, many
of whom don't trust reporters anyway.

Whenever they are accused of impropriety, the media tend to farm the
blame out to the public by claiming that they are simply giving the
people what they want. In the Clinton-Lewinsky matter, the argument
is likely to be that the people wanted to see someone get nailed to
the wall.

Odds are, however, that these same people will turn on the press like
a pack of hungry coyotes if Clinton is ultimately cleared of
wrongdoing.

If the president is to be held to a higher moral standard than the
rest of the American people by virtue of his position, then
journalists charged with reporting and analyzing facts should be held
to a higher standard of conduct than innuendo and smarmy wisecracks.

[Kameron Cole is a columnist for the Emerald. Her views do not
necessarily represent those of the newspaper.]



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Sat Oct 24 1998 - 01:00:53 PDT