The Media likes to group and define personalities that they believe everyone should be able to relate to.
“Which ‘Breakfast Club’ Character are you?”
Pick one! Vote! Relate! Fit In!

With the invention of “viewer-directed” television (American Idol, Dancing With the Stars) the public is given the illusion that these categories are self-defined: that we define social standards for ourselves, our colleagues, etc.

The real challenge is to maintain a strong ’self’ identity, “yet [be] successful” (p.101). Sometimes being ‘definable’ is the only realistic means of being promoted, advanced, and rewarded within a system.  If you fit into the ‘promotable’ box, you will be.But not to say that there aren’t distinguishable, and widely accepted characteristics of an entire social group. (this is what Siegel suggests with “Monk” as an example.  His crazy-ness no longer separates him, but becomes a ‘relatable’ element as the general public sees more and more of him and his lifestyle becomes adopted into a character skin.

In general, It IS hard to separate from the collective because someone from us [whether it was up to the media or the general public] created the character types and they’re based off of some one real person, or many.

by the way, I’m Brian Johnson