Funny, but I’ve been thinking about something one of my regular Soul Daviders said concerning humor and the perceived lack of it in Archuworld (must’ve been Mike). I do agree that, for some Archies, everything about David is taken quite seriously and quite literally. Unfortunately, that means it doesn’t leave much room to poke fun at our idol or even at ourselves.
Or maybe it’s just the climate we’re living in. After all, as Sesame Street gets ready to turn 40, the Fox News network decided to read deeper into a two-year-old episode in which Oscar the Grouch – reporting from his trash can for GNN (Garbage News Network) – deals with a viewer who threatens to switch to Pox News. Somehow, Fox News (not understanding the play on words in regards to Oscar’s fixation on all things trashy – morons!) has decided this is yet another attempt at liberal political indoctrination of our children. I kid you not! That, my friends, is the humorless environment in which we find ourselves. So why should I be surprised that some in Archuworld can’t take certain jokes either?
But one thing has struck me whenever Archies come to David’s defense (whenever someone attacks his music). There is always someone somewhere pointing to David’s “character” as a reason why he should not be mocked or why his music should not provoke negativity. I know the one time I decided to respond to a naysayer (which was mostly due to the attack on David’s fans, and an attack that had no humor underlying it), I made sure the focus was on David’s music and talent and why both justified my fan status. Somehow, defending David’s “character,” especially to naysayers who make fun of him precisely because they find him too clean-cut, seems an odd thing to defend.
But then, I realize that I’m less concerned about “David’s character” as I am about his Voice. For me, if David didn’t have the looks and the charisma and just had that phenomenal one-of-a-kind Voice, that would be enough for me. Granted, I don’t know if I would be ODD about him, but his Voice would be enough for me to buy his CDs and his concert tickets. David’s “character,” it seems to me, is just icing on the cake, not the main ingredient.
And then, I started wondering: is David’s “character” (however that gets defined) the main reason for some fans’ devotion? Is his character the “main ingredient,” while his Voice is just “icing on the cake”? Maybe we’re not all the same kind of fan. I’m only raising this question because there have been some phenomenal music artists whose “character” leaves little to be desired. I believe Billie Holiday to be the greatest vocalist ever, but she couldn’t recover from her heroine addiction and led a bit of a tragic life. Michael Jackson definitely led a life that I would hardly find admirable, yet there’s no denying his ginormous artistry, and I wept for him when he passed away as if he were family.
I guess I’m just curious about those who harp on David’s “character” as their main reason for fan devotion. It’s a bit unnerving, actually, because it sets David up on a pedestal, and should he ever fall from it (yes, our halo-wearing Angel on Earth just might be human enough to slip up), I fear there’s a certain segment of his fanbase that would fall away too. It is with this type of fan in mind that I’m left to ask: isn’t the Voice enough? I know it is for me.