The First Part of 'An Ethnographer in Paradise'

On the beach at Eze-Sur-Mer: Larry Ellison's yacht 'The Rising Sun' is moored out in the bay. Behind us are the houses of  Bono and The Edge of U2. Effectively, they share the same grounds. Bono's is the more forward, standing directly over the beach. The Edge's is slightly more withdrawn, a large, attractive, yellow-painted traditional house nestling in greenery. Both houses are very large, so large that even on an ample site they are rather squashed between the sea and the Nice-Monaco railway behind. This is not a tranquil idyll, but a small, lively, almost bohemian, perimeter to Monaco. But these are Dublin boys and after growing up with the traffic of that city, the noise of the Riviera is probably more homely than the quiet of some Caribbean island.

I am not sure I have had any close encounters with celebrity. This isn't one either, but its a sudden, almost shocking, profound insight into the scale and wealth of the 'A'-list. Ellison's yacht is well-chronicled; even the yacht-classes are stirred by it. Bono's house 'Eze Les Roses' receives less attention on the internet but a little later research tells me that it is one of three that he owns.

As I sit on the beach it is possible for me to get some impression of the scale of the operation involved in running a house for one of U2. The house itself maintains its privacy, by virtue of its high sea wall and the short beach, but I can see the domestic and security staff at their business. They are trimming roses, watching, cleaning, going between Eze Les Roses and The Edge's house. They are a multi-cultural crew: many in black t-shirts but one or two seem to be dressed for the office. Most notable is a rather hot looking man who stands in the front of The Edge's house using binoculars to survey the beach for unwelcome photographers. Does this mean that U2 are at home?

Soon a small two-seater helicopter comes over the hills and buzzes around houses and yacht. Could this be the paparazzi? Could it be really? I am not sure at first but then I notice that it gains disapproving looks from the staff of the U2 houses. It must be. I am amidst the genuine life experience of the 'A'-list.

My youngest daughter is bored and so we go for a walk along the beach. 

Later we pass by the shared gateway of the U2 houses as we make our way back to our apartment. We are carrying bags of shopping. My wife and eldest daughter are ahead, talking. I am with my slower-paced younger daughter. As my wife and eldest pass the gates, a car pulls up and waits. Immersed in conversation my wife notices nothing, but I see that it is Bono at the wheel. I notice the voice first. Loud. Dublin. Warm. I think you can tell singers by the way they speak. He is talking to two others in the car, a bald man in the front and a dark-haired woman in the back.

It is Bono. Bono of U2, of social-campaigns, of poverty-campaigns, of 'The Joshua Tree' and grammys. It is Pavarotti's mate, Cruz's hero, Live8's Sgt. Pepper,  handshaker of Mandela, Clinton, Bush and Blair. He is there: customary shades, a loud voice, and older and plumper looking than I might have imagined (but then, to be fair, I haven't really followed his career so my memories are probably of an earlier era).  

My wife walks on obliviously as the gates open and Bono drives down to his house.

The car, by the way, was a 6-series convertible BMW. Yes, a convertible with the hood down. All that security and you drive an open-topped car.  

Some thoughts: 

The myth of counter-culture: Rock 'n' Roll was never counter-cultural. Youth culture was never rebellion. This is its marketing-hype, its stance. But its idols and icons aspire only to join the list of the wealthy. Aspiring to wealth is not counter-culture. It is conformance.

Historically, it is also corporate. 

The biggest change if you make it to the top of the 'A' -list is that you become the boss. They are your staff out there in the garden trimming roses, watching through binoculars etc. You are the boss. You may have grown up in the Dublin suburbs with no immediate prospect of doing anything other than  working for someone else, but by virtue of your rock 'n' roll career, and its pact with the corporate giants of the media industry, you have become the boss. And you've achieved this within a single half-lifetime.

The only difference between the Ellison and Bono is that in the celebrity industry, ultimately, the person is the product. Ellison sells software. Bono sells Bono.  In all other respects, it is the normal business of the corporate supra-structure.

The new aristocracy: Meanwhile, your A-list kids will inhabit social networks of great wealth and knowledge. They too will have their hands on the controls of the means of production.  They may complain or 'rebel' , but the kids of the famous are in a gilded vat. Their talents are given best light. Their shortcomings are given best protection. For generations to come, "Grandaddy Bono" will be revered for the wealth he brought to the family.

Here is James Jagger, seemingly a nice 'down-to Earth' guy, talking in The Sunday Times. It sounds like his parents have given him a good emotional frame for his life. He certainly has powerful financial and knowledge networks at his back. He should do very well indeed.

Today we construct our super-class in a new way. But we still have a super-class. And they still elevate themselves above the normal concerns of the mass, like tax. This is a very significant point in Bono's case for, as many commentators have pointed out, there is a connection between developing world debt-relief and the taxation burden in the developed world. Debt-relief is undoubtedly ethical and right, how does the debt ultimately get paid if not then by the nurses, teachers, managers and cleaners of the developed world.

When it comes to tax, the celebrity campaigners exit stage right. Quickly. 

Social-campaigns and leadership of the masses. In some ways, Bono is the ultimate instantiation of an argument that says social-good is done through the awareness-raising role of celebrities. His achievement, as fellow-celebrity Penelope Cruz testifies, is that he brings the light of the world's media to shine on issues of great concern. Perhaps it is since Live Aid and the activities of that other eloquent Irishman, Bob Geldof, that we have happily deployed a model wherein rich but well-known celebrities exhort less-rich people to do more in a good cause.

This may seem paradoxical but, so the argument goes, it is both necessary and a just use of the 'platform' of the celebrity.

Maybe. But it also seems like Society 1.0. It seems slightly dated and hierarchical. As Paul Hawken's book 'Blessed Unrest' points out, the green movement has grown from thousands of little pieces. The green climate change lobby neither has nor needs a global spokesperson. It is a movement of the concerned. The famous who inhabit its ranks never own or lead it, and as Al Gore's recent experience testifies, they often have an uncomfortable relationship with it.

So, is celebrity leadership of poverty-campaigns actually just more of normal corporate culture?  Naomi Klein has provocatively argued that the corporates sell our culture back to us.  And, yes, we were concerned about poverty before any celebrity co-opted the issue. This is just as we are concerned about the fate of the planet.

As Pink Floyd didn't say, "We don't need no celebucation!" 

On Bono.  For all of this, for some reason, I like what I know of Bono. He seems interesting, a mass of contradictions. This, perhaps, is the mystery we call charisma.  He has it.

Hand on heart, if I had the money he has, I cannot say with certainty that I'd do better with it.