We're a fickle mob, yes we are. Back in 2004, we were lining up to crucify Steve Irwin for apparently endangering the life of his infant son, Bob, during that televised incident that made world news. Today, the same man is "our Steve", "Irwin the superstar", a "phenomenon", an "Aussie hero", an "Australian legend", "our man", "our lovable larrikin" - not a hint of the scornful regard in which we held him just two years ago, replaced with a no less cynical sauce that borders on complete insanity, today's papers once again so choked with teary tributes and agonised eulogies I can't even bring myself to search for the rest of the news. This is the way of things in the 21st century - death, far more newsworthy than life, sucks the frankness and honesty clean out of the media.
Now, for heaven's sake, don't commit the error of thinking I'm kicking Irwin here. I liked Steve Irwin - or, at least, I liked his public persona. I didn't know him personally, so I can't speak of him intimately (as many others appear to be comfortable doing). But everyone I know who knew him, or who met him in passing, seemed determined to impress upon me the news that he was as good a bloke as he seemed. While not moved to tears by his death (I didn't know him, you see), I can at least say I'm sorry he's gone, and that I feel for his wife and children. Who wouldn't?
But what winds me up about celebrity death these days is the manner in which the frauds in the media fair blow their loads in the "outpouring of grief" that has became standard issue since Diana's sick and prolonged exit. Footage runs in slow motion as pianos tinkle, while every columnist with the imagination of a duck jumps up for their own gooey turn at the pulpit in a free-to-air funeral service that never ends.
During these times, anyone who dares speak his or her mind, giving an honest opinion unbothered by the forced public ceremony of misery, is howled down as a creep and a heretic by the very people who are being the fakes.
Germaine Greer is someone who has never ceased to speak her mind - if she feels strongly about something, you can depend upon her to voice it, and she doesn't care how many public hankies are filled with snot as a result. Today, Greer hasn't disappointed her own reputation, adding a touch of vinegar to the volumes of syrup that we've endured since Monday. Those journalists carrying Irwin's casket have dropped their charge in pursuit of the gatecrasher, the "outpouring of grief" suddenly morphing into an explosion of sanctimonious outrage.
Loudest of all is the Melbourne Herald Sun, who report today that "a storm of fury has erupted over Germaine Greer's criticism of Steve Irwin". In fact, the "storm" was induced by The Herald Sun's own journalists, jumping on the phone to extract whatever inclement weather they could muster from interested (or otherwise) parties. It was a piece whose opinion was decided with or without the phone calls, editorialising thusly:
"The expat Aussie, known more these days for her regular bashing of her homeland...hit below the belt as she accused Irwin of sending the wrong message to kids."
This is interesting, for, two years ago, The Herald Sun led the witchhunt for Irwin, Jill Singer hooking in good and proper in an editorial headlined: "Dad's a Drongo". In contrast to Greer's "scathing attack", which at least had the temper to go the issue and not the man, Singer's piece referred to Irwin as "simple-minded", "Neanderthal", "a Tarzanesque, chest-beating reductionist", a "dangerous dropkick" and a "dill", before going on to declare that "this foolish pair" of parents were setting a lousy example indeed, their actions comparable to some of the world's more loathed personages:
"Steve has a lot in common with his heroes. John Howard toughens up the babies of asylum seekers by locking them behind razor wire from the time they're born, while George Bush assures the world that Iraqi and Afghani babies must be bombed for their own good."
The piece went on to compare Irwin to Michael Jackson.
I'm not saying Singer's piece was any more or less worthy than Greer's - in fact, I can appreciate both opinions, particularly today. If Irwin's death teaches us anything at all, it's that no situation involving wild animals is as "under control" as Steve would have liked us to believe back in 2004. If he could speak today, I'm convinced he'd agree that it was better the 'unexpected' happened when it did rather than when it simply might have.
What's happened between then and now? Nothing much, really - Irwin never changed his approach to life, and, as far as I know, never issued anything close to an apology for the way he lived.
What's changed is that, today, he's dead, and death sells by the bushell.
But you can't sell a dead "drongo", so it's "hero", "legend" and "larrikin" all the way, and anyone who doesn't toe that line is a creep.
How pathetic.