By David Spates / davespates@tds.net
March 02, 2009 04:41 pm
—
I thought supermodels died out with Y2K, dial-up modems and Monica Lewinsky jokes. Apparently not. We still have supermodels in the world, fighting for truth, justice and the American way, which, of course, includes silicone enhancement and thigh-high boots worn to the grocery store.
I don’t begrudge supermodels one bit. Why should I? If I were ultra-handsome and a clothing designer wanted to pay me millions to wear his clothes, I’d take his money faster than you can say “metrosexual.”
A lot of people think supermodels are paid too much. I don’t. If someone is willing to pay a supermodel $2 million a year for an ad campaign, that’s what the model is worth. It’s the same in pro sports. Al Haynesworth just signed a $100 million deal with the Redskins. Who’s to say that $100 million is too much money? Not I. The modeling market sets its prices, the football market sets its prices, and the newspaper market sets its prices. I’m sure someone somewhere thinks that I’m paid too much to write about supermodels, toilet paper and red leashes. Maybe I am. (Truth be told, the money a newspaper columnist makes isn’t all that grand, but the fringe benefits are phenomenal. They treat me to all the newspapers I can eat. Beat that, Christie Brinkley.)
I guess the only thing about supermodels that makes me a little bitter is the “super” part — it sounds like these women should be wearing capes and hanging out with Batman and the Green Lantern at the Hall of Justice. Superheroes aside, I understand the concept behind supermodels. As in any industry, there are strata of employees. I am a newspaper columnist, just as George Will and Sam Venable are newspaper columnists, but that doesn’t mean we all carry the same relevance. I am not on the same level as Venable, and the two of us together, squared and multiplied by a factor of 100 still wouldn’t add up to the relevance and insight of Will. There are newspaper columnists, and then there are newspaper columnists, just as there are lower-grade models and then there are supermodels.
My concern is this: Why doesn’t anyone else get to include the “super” prefix in the job title? I think George Will might like the sound of supercolumnist. And if you’re talking about a nine-digit contract, I think that Al Haynesworth should be referred to as a superlineman. If you reach a certain level in your profession, I think you should be allowed to call yourself super just like supermodels do. Sadly, I can’t in good conscience call myself a supercolumnist — maybe around the house, but that’s about it.
Think of all the jobs that could and SHOULD warrant a super prefix. You could have an entire battalion of supersoldiers. How about a few superofficers patrolling your town? Wouldn’t you like your kids to go to a school that had some superteachers? SuperEMTs, superparents, superfirefighters — the list could go on and on.
We all know what the ensuing problem would be, however. Before you know it everyone would want their jobs to include supers. Supermodels are bad enough, but what if the guy who did your taxes suddenly insisted that you call him a superaccountant? Dun, dun, dunnnnnn! It’s SuperCPA! Faster than a speeding 1040 form, more powerful than an IRS audit, able to itemize in a single bound! “Stand back, Lois. These revenue reports could strike at any moment.”
Don’t think it couldn’t happen.
Certainly everyone’s job is important to society, but what would we do with supertrashmen, superbakers, supersalesmen, superbartenders and superproctologists? I just don’t know. Someone had better get working on all those capes. Someone like a superseamstress.
David Spates is a Knoxville resident and Crossville Chronicle contributor whose column is published each Tuesday. He can be reached at davespates@tds.net.
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.
Photos
