Hi Don

Yes I think there is a lot about the concepts of 'stardom' and 'celebrity' 
that are interchangeable and dependent on one another. I am not arguing 
that celebrity is a newer development of stardom, just that celebrity as a 
concept and field of study seem to be much more prominent now than stardom 
or star studies. It could even - perhaps! - be argued that celebrity 
predates the idea of a 'star' - Any person in history who had notoriety 
could be described as having celebrity, but were they a 'star' in the way 
that we understand it? I think there's a fuzziness and slippiness to these 
terms. What interests me is the historical process from star studies (which 
definitely incorporates the concept of celebrity) to celebrity studies 
(which appears to have a wider/broader scope... however that may just be a 
perception that can easily be overturned when examining the breadth of star 
studies work). I think because celebrity *culture* is much more pervasive 
and part of everyday life - more so than ever before, I'd argue - this is 
why celebrity and celebrity studies is more of an apt choice these days... 
but the argument can go on and on!

On Jan 23 2010, Larsson, Donald F wrote:

> Just curious, since this is not my field as such. Isn't there a very long 
> tradition of theatrical stars crossing over with a kind of pre-electronic 
> celebrity status? I think of the "divine" Sarah Bernhardt, Edward Kean 
> (see Sartre's play, which adapts a Dumas play, as a kind of 
> star/celebrity critique), etc., going at least back to the "nine days 
> wonder" of Will Kemp's Morris Dance from London to Norwich. In short, 
> "celebrity" is not that modern a phenomenon.
>
>Don
>
>___________________________________________________
>"Only connect!"   --E.M. Forster
>
>Donald F. Larsson, Professor
>English Department, Minnesota State University, Mankato
>Mail: 230 Armstrong Hall, Minnesota State University
>        Mankato, MN 56001 Office Phone: 507-389-2368 
> ________________________________________ From: Film and TV Studies 
> Discussion List [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Corinna Tomrley 
> [[log in to unmask]] Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 5:13 AM To: 
> [log in to unmask] Subject: [SCREEN-L] Star/Celebrity studies
>
>Hi
>
>I'm writing about the move from Star studies to Celebrity studies - perhaps
>an inevitable development in our celebrity-saturated culture. There's
>reasons for arguing why it's happened both academically as well as in
>everyday life... however I wondered if people doing work in this area are
>all calling it celebrity studies? Does anyone still refer to their work as
>'Star Studies'? Even though I can think of some argument to say that a
>particular article or piece of research is more about the 'star' than about
>'celebrity'; I wonder if, as a field, celebrity studies has become an all
>encompassing term?
>
>Be great to hear feedback on this, especially if you or anyone you know of
>is still using 'star studies'!
>
>Thanks
>Corinna
>--
>
>Corinna Tomrley
>Centre for Women's Studies
>University of York
>
>http://www.rawnervebooks.co.uk/FSUK.html
>
>----
>For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives:
>http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html
>
>----
>Learn to speak like a film/TV professor! Listen to the ScreenLex
>podcast:
>http://www.screenlex.org
>

-- 

Corinna Tomrley
Centre for Women's Studies
University of York

http://www.rawnervebooks.co.uk/FSUK.html

----
To sign off Screen-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF Screen-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]