Dawson Leery is no more. Actor James Van Der Beek has died prematurely at the age of 48. He leaves behind his wife Kimberly and their six children. In addition to a worldwide mourning because several generations have grown up with ‘Dawson’s Creek’, the series that accompanied millions of teenagers in the transition from compulsory school to adulthood. Or, if nothing else, up to that of work, of University, to the phase in which we would begin to take the first steps towards our future.

The news shocked everyone, even though unfortunately the actor’s serious illness had been known for some time. At the time of the sad announcement, on the evening of Wednesday 11 February, people on social media began to express enormous condolences with phrases, emojis and memories experienced in front of the TV. They’re still doing it, it’s almost impossible to open X, for example, without coming across a scene from ‘Dawson’s Creek’. An excellent way, among other things, to introduce the series, which ended in 2003, even to those who weren’t around at the time or were in their cradle 20 years ago.

Then, the media arrived. And here, I am perfectly aware, I am stuck in a petition of principle: I write online, I do it for a living, but I want to say, I really care, that the ways in which this type of news is given to the public is wrong, morbid, vulture-like and, in a word, unacceptable. It wasn’t enough to report it, no, once again sites, televisions and newspapers felt the need to delve into the private life of Van Der Beek, among other things a person who has never given anything to talk about, in that sense, i.e. from the point of view of gossip and controversy. The national press has this vice: it doesn’t let the dead rest, on the contrary, it even does the math in their pockets. And just because this happens doesn’t mean it’s right.

Everyone has to do the math in Van Der Beek’s pocket

Yet, in fact, it happens. It happens every time a famous person leaves us. Even today with Van Der Beek, hundreds of articles are flocking online detailing how he was financially placed, who has (or would have) betrayed him in life, the roles he didn’t get, the most intimate and private details about the illness that took him away. Personally, I came to know many things that I would never have thought of looking for, spontaneously. And now I have them in my head, I can’t forget them. There is the ‘friend’ who is the former protagonist of another TV series, I don’t even want to mention him, who posts a photo on his social media with Van Der Breek on his deathbed, taken the day before he passed away. Our guy is keen to point out that he gave him the last laugh. And the problem, bad personal taste aside, is not him, but the fact that the shot went viral, because it was placed at the top of every online newspaper. This is not condolence, it is profiteering, pain pornography. We don’t know if Van Der Breek would have enjoyed showing himself like this, in his last hours, in front of the whole world. We know, of course, that he showed up in front of the cameras even when he was (alive and) ill, primarily to invite everyone to take preventive measures for pancreatic cancer. And this, however, is a very different thing.

“He had sold all his memorabilia to cure himself.” But was it really necessary to give this information?

The photo of the actor eroded by the disease is everywhere, accompanied by headlines that underline that he had sold everything to try, in vain, to cure himself, even ‘Dawson’s Creek memorabilia’. Is it necessary to give this information? Is this information? For me, no. In any case, they are or would be (bad) affairs of his, they should not be fed to the world which simply wants to remember him and pay homage to him. You can’t argue about everything, even more so about death. Especially if death occurs after a long illness and there is nothing to clarify or ascertain. Unfortunately it happened like this, let’s cry and hug each other. But this doesn’t click, it doesn’t capture attention. And so, beyond a few editorials in memory, we have to beat the iron of the hype (around a mourning!, ed.) by rushing to do the math in his pocket: he died poor, he died rich, how much did the wallets of his millionaire friends really support him? There are those who insinuate the doubt that they had abandoned him. And now they are commemorating him on social media just for ‘visibility’. This type of post is not information, it is stuff published only to increase engagement and views with some excellent ‘conspiracy theory’. On the skin of a ‘famous’ still warm corpse and especially when, in reality, no one can know such details with certainty. Not from Italy, no, not even if you took a photo of us together at a Comic-Con a few months ago in some Italian city. Right, Mr. Destroy?

Fundraising and useless controversies

Meanwhile, the Van Der Breek family has opened a GoFundMe, a fundraiser. Donations immediately skyrocketed, as did, unfortunately, the imaginative reconstructions of the press. An emblem of this is the hunt for famous names who have contributed to the initiative: among the list of many adherents, a ‘Steven Spielberg’ appears who gave 25 thousand dollars. The historic director was, in the series, the living myth of the teenage Dawson. So yes, it’s a nice gesture (always assuming that it was actually him who did it and not a person, perhaps a wealthy one, who chose to contribute under a pseudonym to pay homage to Dawson’s memory). But nothing, it has to be Spielberg and off we go with the safe titles, without conditions. Titles that obviously trigger controversy: ‘Only 25 thousand dollars?! For someone like Spielberg they’re tiny! She left him a tip! What a shame!’. These comments are also read online and this time it is not the ‘fault’ of the ‘people of the web’, of their proverbial ‘ferocity’. But of the ‘ferocity’ of the editorial line of those who give the news and decide to focus on as many useless, but possibly divisive and like-grabbing details as possible. Including the problems experienced by the couple, James and Kimberly, in giving birth to their children. I won’t say more, even if you already know even these, they are splashed out everywhere as if they were, once again, our business or information of any public importance. It’s not like that, really, it’s not like that.

Perhaps never more than with the loss of Van Der Breek has we seen the discrepancy between what the public really wanted, that is to mourn him and commemorate him through memories and scenes from the cult series, and the morbid and vulture-like proposal of the media which fed everyone dramas, details, completely superfluous and, indeed, ferocious shots. Goodbye Dawson and sorry: once again, we can’t let the dead rest in peace. And we have to go and do the math in his pocket. Luckily, people don’t remember you for this but for all the emotions you made them experience by playing one of the most beloved characters in the world of serials. We were very lucky to grow up with you, with you Cape Side kids. And this is how we want to commemorate you: that boy from Cape Side eternally in love with Joey Potter who, in the end, takes pole but realizes all the dreams he had hanging in his bedroom since middle school. He becomes a director and meets Spielberg in person. In our hearts you will forever be the young and beautiful dreamer with his head in the clouds who everyone considered deluded and who, in the end, really made it. Thanks, Dawson. Rest in peace.