I think I understand why Curtis Sittenfeld is so broken up about Kathy Griffin?s divorce from her husband, Matt Moline. In ?Divorce on the D-List,? Sittenfeld explores why Griffin and Moline?s breakup hits harder than most of the celebrity divorces announced in the past year. For Sittenfeld, the divorce news is dispiriting because her experience of promotional book touring was in some ways analogous to Griffin?s promotional tour for her DVD, which is depicted on the Bravo reality show My Life on the D-List. A large part of the show?s appeal is Griffin?s rapport with Moline; their D-list relationship seemed loving, respectful, and, well, real. Over the course of the show?s first season, Moline is represented as a supportive, funny, caring husband, and Griffin seems genuinely happy with their relationship.

Sittenfeld turns to Joshua Gamson, professor of sociology at the University of San Francisco and author of the excellent Freaks Talk Back: Tabloid Talk Shows and Sexual Noncomformity, to help her make sense of her attachment to the Griffin-Moline marriage. Gamson makes some good points about why those of us who watched season one might be so invested in the relationship, suggesting that reality shows may be most successful when they allow us to work out our own fantasies and identifications through a show?s central figures. Sittenfeld writes:

If I got sucked into Griffin?s life, that was the point, Gamson told me. ?The idea is that you?ll build an attachment to the story ? it?s like brand loyalty,? he said. This goal actually doesn’t succeed most of the time, Gamson explained, and although we as a society avidly follow celebrity gossip, ?the activity is lateral. We?re looking at them sideways. It?s not about the individual?s relationship to the star but about the relationship between the people watching the star. When they gossip, people are making collective judgments, moral evaluations that have no consequences.? TomKat, anyone?

At the same time, Gamson said, all of us have our own ?small cluster of celebrities? about whom we genuinely care. ?You find some point of identification,? he said. ?If you have a bunch, you invest in the star?s story.?

Like Sittenfeld, I found myself invested in Griffin and Moline?s story, and can?t help but feel like a dupe now that it?s evident that the ?reality? of the relationship depicted on the show leaves much to be desired. I still haven?t figured out exactly what kinds of identification I made with Griffin — a great, sarcastic, cynical, annoying performer — endure many a humiliating promotional event, but Sittenfeld?s and Gamson?s analyses suggest that I am (we are) not alone in mourning the demise of the Griffin-Moline union.