Ann Coulter, The Good, The Brand, & The Ugly

Ann Coulter’s latest post about ebola, idiocy and Christians missionaries mixed spoiled fish, putrid eggs and an ashtray full of bile enough to offend most any human. I was not offended, though, because of the real content of the post was clear. It wasn’t about Dr. Kent Brantly or his nurse, nor about the need for Christian work here in the American mission fields, nor even about conservative politics, these only from the container of the real reeking center of her post —Ann Coulter, the brand. Her post was in same league as her post about how unAmerican soccer was during the World Cup, and the rest of her books and essays, which is to say, Ann Coulter, the brand.

Coulter is but a small performance artist along the lines of Madonna, Rush Limbaugh, Charles Barkley and Mark Driscoll, among others who are out to outrage for fame and fortune. Such performance artists are like Google Place balloons popping up throughout American life: music, film, sports, religion, politics, literature and almost all public endeavors. These performance artists come in all political and public hues, but share little concern about their purported identity. They may claim liberal, conservative, sports broadcaster, singer, or Christian pastor, but their true medium is outrage.

Their art is simple and effective, say and do outrageous things and then watch as people react. Coulter will continue to post outrageous things without apology, tact or responsibility. That is her schtick and what puts bread on her table, the kind that is hand made by a personal chef, because such performance art pays quite well. It is good to pay tribute to the American gods of success and mammon, even if it lacks compassion for a doctor and nurse or their families as the doctor and nurse fight for their lives. Coulter the brand is concerned with the brand’s image and drawing attention to the brand. Nothing more.

The success of this performance art comes from the simple enjoyment we get by both being outraged and having others we don’t like being outraged. Being outraged or laughing at others being outraged is both fun and a distraction. Why worry about how our lives are going, better to vent at Coulter or laugh at those angry with her. It’s fun for all. So, why the hubbub, you may ask?

The main problems with this performance art of saying outrageous things, of course, has been revealed in the troubles of another one of these performance artists, Pastor Mark Driscoll. The brand is the experience and has no real context. The brand comes before the identity. Driscoll got famous for being the cussing pastor, and cussing came to define him more than his faith. To keep the brand going, the artist has to keep upping the act. As the act goes up so is it silliness and disconnection from reality. And since the only emotion evoked is outrage, it quickly fades. Poor Pastor Driscoll tried to be both a real pastor and Mark Driscoll, the brand. A real life pastor has to be more the writing a outrageous book called “Real Marriage.” The outrageous artists get lock up by their art, and their brand, having little positive and mostly negative impact on real life.

Charles Barkley, the brand, sounding off about the NCAA or NBA has little effect on ether one’s direction and his quotes are viewed as Charles being Charles. Pastor Mark Driscoll, the brand, can’t function as a real pastor and ends up trying more to manage the brand than doing the work of the church, while hurting a lot of real people in the process. Rush Limbaugh wanted to become NFL commentator, Rush Limbaugh the brand would not allow it. The outrage was too loud. Coulter has no real seat at the table when policy is practiced, and she can offers little in the way of anything meaningful. All there is left is outrage, which is very little, indeed, to stake a life on. The brand takes over and destroys dreams. The brand becomes an all encompassing prison for those that practice it dark arts. Pity, despite the money, becomes its end game.