For some reason, the text of many of today's pop "star" was particularly pleased to talk about how bad they were in school. Some reprimand for disorderly conduct, someone left in the second year, some teachers lead up to the unconscious state their gorgeous hair … There are various ways to treat such a revelation of our "stars": some of these stories about the mischievous childhood lead to tenderness, while others are beginning to grumble to complain about the fact that today the way the scene is open only mediocrities and ignoramuses. But most of all worried about the reaction of young people. They have a strong belief arises that the shortest path to fame is through nursery officers. They all take something at face value. They do not always realize that stories about "crazy" childhood, when the future "star" struck all around their exotic originality — it's just a legend stage, a sort of concert dress, which distinguishes the artist from the common man. The teenager is not just accept the information, it converts it actively. This information becomes the basis for its vital program to develop ways and means to achieve the goal. That is why a man who is something broadcasting in multi-million audience, must have a high sense of responsibility. Is it true that he expresses his thoughts or unconsciously continues to stage the game and said what the fans expect from him? Look, I "own" the same as everything. Hence the ironic and condescending attitude toward learning, and the coquettish ernichane: "Learning is — light and ignorance — a pleasant shade," and arrogant pride. But then transfer over. What remains in the soul of those who listened to the artist? What are the seeds he sowed in the hearts of the gullible? Who did it better? Whom he sent to the path of artistic creativity? As one well-known DJ young journalist asked these questions, he just snorted so fuck you, I'm not for that … In this perplexity disturbance "pop star" pronounced immaturity of civil, human, "nedoobrazovannost." A person who has not built himself as a person, did not realize its mission in society, becoming obedient servant of the crowd, her tastes and needs. It may be, and can sing, but does not know what to sing. If art does not call for light, if it, giggling and winking slyly, pulling people in the "pleasant shade" if it is poisonous acid destroys the immutable value of ironic, then there is a reasonable question: whether such an "art" to society, whether it is worthy of to become part of national culture?
