judgemental; celebrities and standards
coyote's corner
Hi,
If been following this thread, and in fact contributed to it.
While I understand that we need to separate the artist from the private person, I know that it's hard to. They aren't private people - they gave up some of that right to privacy in their quest to be celebrities.
I am very disgusted w/ Tom Cruise. According to an interview w/ Nicole Kidman, she knew they were having problems, but she had been assured and she believed that the problems were not major. As a matter of fact - the interior design for their newest home was - she thought - the biggest problem.
He dumped her - in full view of the world.
I also know that marriages break up - in my family, on my street and certainly in the eye of the camera. However, I think that when we speak of these folks - we must keep in mind that many of them are - much more egotistical than you or I. Another point - celebrities are spoiled. I often compare Hollywood to Mt. Olympus. America has it's gods & goddesses of excess - the celebrity.
I believe that there is a sense of "Look what I've achieved. I am special, I am better than these mere mortals....I deserve what ever it is I want because I can pull millions of people into the box office or to the concert hall. These people love me and I am a god!
I really think there's a sense of that. Look at some of the actions! Sylvester Stallone broke up w/ his live in girlfriend via a fax! That one really got me!!
There's a sense that because these people are famous, their words carry more weight, or they are absolved from certain responsibilities. That's crap! If a person is living in the public eye - they should behave accordingly. Would it have killed Tom Cruise to quietly talk w/ Nicole? Would it have killed him to respect her? Couldn't he have used discretion and patience? Did he have to let her know long distance? Couldn't he have waited before jumping into the limelight w/ Penelope Cruz? And her....look at her record...she's had an affair w/ most of her leading men? What does all of this say about her?
It's a lack of respect; it's an lack of responsibility.
And w/ Tom Cruise - anyway - I simply won't go see his work - not that I was ever a big fan.
I hope I expalin this ok.
I don't think I'm being judgemental. I think I'm "voting with my pocketbook"
Janis
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If been following this thread, and in fact contributed to it.
While I understand that we need to separate the artist from the private person, I know that it's hard to. They aren't private people - they gave up some of that right to privacy in their quest to be celebrities.
I am very disgusted w/ Tom Cruise. According to an interview w/ Nicole Kidman, she knew they were having problems, but she had been assured and she believed that the problems were not major. As a matter of fact - the interior design for their newest home was - she thought - the biggest problem.
He dumped her - in full view of the world.
I also know that marriages break up - in my family, on my street and certainly in the eye of the camera. However, I think that when we speak of these folks - we must keep in mind that many of them are - much more egotistical than you or I. Another point - celebrities are spoiled. I often compare Hollywood to Mt. Olympus. America has it's gods & goddesses of excess - the celebrity.
I believe that there is a sense of "Look what I've achieved. I am special, I am better than these mere mortals....I deserve what ever it is I want because I can pull millions of people into the box office or to the concert hall. These people love me and I am a god!
I really think there's a sense of that. Look at some of the actions! Sylvester Stallone broke up w/ his live in girlfriend via a fax! That one really got me!!
There's a sense that because these people are famous, their words carry more weight, or they are absolved from certain responsibilities. That's crap! If a person is living in the public eye - they should behave accordingly. Would it have killed Tom Cruise to quietly talk w/ Nicole? Would it have killed him to respect her? Couldn't he have used discretion and patience? Did he have to let her know long distance? Couldn't he have waited before jumping into the limelight w/ Penelope Cruz? And her....look at her record...she's had an affair w/ most of her leading men? What does all of this say about her?
It's a lack of respect; it's an lack of responsibility.
And w/ Tom Cruise - anyway - I simply won't go see his work - not that I was ever a big fan.
I hope I expalin this ok.
I don't think I'm being judgemental. I think I'm "voting with my pocketbook"
Janis
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
coyote's corner
I also wish spell check worked!! That word "expalin" - should have been explained.
----- Original Message -----
From: coyote's corner
To: Unschooling-dotcom@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 4:16 PM
Subject: [Unschooling-dotcom] judgemental; celebrities and standards
Hi,
If been following this thread, and in fact contributed to it.
While I understand that we need to separate the artist from the private person, I know that it's hard to. They aren't private people - they gave up some of that right to privacy in their quest to be celebrities.
I am very disgusted w/ Tom Cruise. According to an interview w/ Nicole Kidman, she knew they were having problems, but she had been assured and she believed that the problems were not major. As a matter of fact - the interior design for their newest home was - she thought - the biggest problem.
He dumped her - in full view of the world.
I also know that marriages break up - in my family, on my street and certainly in the eye of the camera. However, I think that when we speak of these folks - we must keep in mind that many of them are - much more egotistical than you or I. Another point - celebrities are spoiled. I often compare Hollywood to Mt. Olympus. America has it's gods & goddesses of excess - the celebrity.
I believe that there is a sense of "Look what I've achieved. I am special, I am better than these mere mortals....I deserve what ever it is I want because I can pull millions of people into the box office or to the concert hall. These people love me and I am a god!
I really think there's a sense of that. Look at some of the actions! Sylvester Stallone broke up w/ his live in girlfriend via a fax! That one really got me!!
There's a sense that because these people are famous, their words carry more weight, or they are absolved from certain responsibilities. That's crap! If a person is living in the public eye - they should behave accordingly. Would it have killed Tom Cruise to quietly talk w/ Nicole? Would it have killed him to respect her? Couldn't he have used discretion and patience? Did he have to let her know long distance? Couldn't he have waited before jumping into the limelight w/ Penelope Cruz? And her....look at her record...she's had an affair w/ most of her leading men? What does all of this say about her?
It's a lack of respect; it's an lack of responsibility.
And w/ Tom Cruise - anyway - I simply won't go see his work - not that I was ever a big fan.
I hope I expalin this ok.
I don't think I'm being judgemental. I think I'm "voting with my pocketbook"
Janis
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 6/1/03 2:20:52 PM, jana@... writes:
<< However, I think that when we speak of these folks - we must keep in mind
that many of them are - much more egotistical than you or I. Another point -
celebrities are spoiled. >>
I really don't like to use the term "spoiled" of people, myself. I hate the
very idea that people will say a child is "spoiled."
And over the years of deciding it was a really bad concept, very harmful, I
tried to notice when and why it was used.
It's used when someone is jealous of the other person. I haven't see it used
otherwise.
<I believe that there is a sense of "Look what I've achieved. I am special, I
am better than these mere mortals....I deserve what ever it is I want because
I can pull millions of people into the box office or to the concert hall.
These people love me and I am a god!>>
What some of them can do IS pretty special. There was a Carol King show on
PBS last night and she's pretty damned special. Should she get to have
whatever piano she wants to have on stage and not have to move it around by herself?
Yeah, I think so!
<<I really think there's a sense of that. Look at some of the actions!
Sylvester Stallone broke up w/ his live in girlfriend via a fax! That one really got
me!!>>
Bummer that anyone even knows or cares about that.
If he does what he's supposed to do when he's producing, directing or acting,
I don't think we should care what he does the other time. Either watch the
movie or not.
<I don't think I'm being judgemental. I think I'm "voting with my
pocketbook">>
But going to movies isn't voting. It's seeing stories where people act out
parts.
Will you only go and see moral people? What if the star is mo you care about
seeing?
Sandra
<< However, I think that when we speak of these folks - we must keep in mind
that many of them are - much more egotistical than you or I. Another point -
celebrities are spoiled. >>
I really don't like to use the term "spoiled" of people, myself. I hate the
very idea that people will say a child is "spoiled."
And over the years of deciding it was a really bad concept, very harmful, I
tried to notice when and why it was used.
It's used when someone is jealous of the other person. I haven't see it used
otherwise.
<I believe that there is a sense of "Look what I've achieved. I am special, I
am better than these mere mortals....I deserve what ever it is I want because
I can pull millions of people into the box office or to the concert hall.
These people love me and I am a god!>>
What some of them can do IS pretty special. There was a Carol King show on
PBS last night and she's pretty damned special. Should she get to have
whatever piano she wants to have on stage and not have to move it around by herself?
Yeah, I think so!
<<I really think there's a sense of that. Look at some of the actions!
Sylvester Stallone broke up w/ his live in girlfriend via a fax! That one really got
me!!>>
Bummer that anyone even knows or cares about that.
If he does what he's supposed to do when he's producing, directing or acting,
I don't think we should care what he does the other time. Either watch the
movie or not.
<I don't think I'm being judgemental. I think I'm "voting with my
pocketbook">>
But going to movies isn't voting. It's seeing stories where people act out
parts.
Will you only go and see moral people? What if the star is mo you care about
seeing?
Sandra
coyote's corner
In a message dated 6/1/03 2:20:52 PM, jana@... writes:
<< However, I think that when we speak of these folks - we must keep in mind
that many of them are - much more egotistical than you or I. Another point -
celebrities are spoiled. >>
I really don't like to use the term "spoiled" of people, myself. I hate the
very idea that people will say a child is "spoiled."
And over the years of deciding it was a really bad concept, very harmful, I
tried to notice when and why it was used.
It's used when someone is jealous of the other person. I haven't see it used
otherwise. >>>>>>>>You just have.<<<<<<<<<
<I believe that there is a sense of "Look what I've achieved. I am special, I
am better than these mere mortals....I deserve what ever it is I want because
I can pull millions of people into the box office or to the concert hall.
These people love me and I am a god!>>
What some of them can do IS pretty special. There was a Carol King show on
PBS last night and she's pretty damned special. Should she get to have
whatever piano she wants to have on stage and not have to move it around by herself? >>>>>>>>>We aren't talking of her schlepping her piano around. We are speaking of respect and responsibility.<<<<<<<<<
Yeah, I think so!
<<I really think there's a sense of that. Look at some of the actions!
Sylvester Stallone broke up w/ his live in girlfriend via a fax! That one really got
me!!>>
Bummer that anyone even knows or cares about that.
If he does what he's supposed to do when he's producing, directing or acting,
I don't think we should care what he does the other time. Either watch the
movie or not.Does this also apply to priests?
<I don't think I'm being judgemental. I think I'm "voting with my
pocketbook">>
But going to movies isn't voting. It's seeing stories where people act out
parts.
Will you only go and see moral people? What if the star is mo you care about
seeing?
Sandra
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
<< However, I think that when we speak of these folks - we must keep in mind
that many of them are - much more egotistical than you or I. Another point -
celebrities are spoiled. >>
I really don't like to use the term "spoiled" of people, myself. I hate the
very idea that people will say a child is "spoiled."
And over the years of deciding it was a really bad concept, very harmful, I
tried to notice when and why it was used.
It's used when someone is jealous of the other person. I haven't see it used
otherwise. >>>>>>>>You just have.<<<<<<<<<
<I believe that there is a sense of "Look what I've achieved. I am special, I
am better than these mere mortals....I deserve what ever it is I want because
I can pull millions of people into the box office or to the concert hall.
These people love me and I am a god!>>
What some of them can do IS pretty special. There was a Carol King show on
PBS last night and she's pretty damned special. Should she get to have
whatever piano she wants to have on stage and not have to move it around by herself? >>>>>>>>>We aren't talking of her schlepping her piano around. We are speaking of respect and responsibility.<<<<<<<<<
Yeah, I think so!
<<I really think there's a sense of that. Look at some of the actions!
Sylvester Stallone broke up w/ his live in girlfriend via a fax! That one really got
me!!>>
Bummer that anyone even knows or cares about that.
If he does what he's supposed to do when he's producing, directing or acting,
I don't think we should care what he does the other time. Either watch the
movie or not.Does this also apply to priests?
<I don't think I'm being judgemental. I think I'm "voting with my
pocketbook">>
But going to movies isn't voting. It's seeing stories where people act out
parts.
Will you only go and see moral people? What if the star is mo you care about
seeing?
Sandra
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 6/1/03 1:20:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jana@... writes:
saying Jana, my issue is that unless you are Nicoles sister, mother or best
friend, how would you know what actually transpired? Even then stories are
often skewed to make one party appear in better light than the other. I mean just
because People or Rolling Stone say something doesn't make it the full story.
Besides which, when they made that stupid flick together, which title escapes
me now, where they were the married couple and he got into that alternative
sex scene, it became public that they got a sex therapist to help them with
those parts for the movie. Hello, red flag!!! The day I need someone's help making
love to my husband, I should be aware that we have some issues. That was long
before their break up. Needless to say that she met Tom while he was married
to his first wife, and while he was her leading man in that other stupid flick
they did about race car driving. What goes around, comes around as the saying
goes.
Tom and Nicole's marriage is none of our business just because they are in
the lime light of Hollywood, just as it isn't our business whether the President
is doing an intern or not. Either way it doesn't change anything in my daily
life nor my pocket book. Watch or don't watch, listen or don't listen, vote or
don't vote, spend or don't spend. Frankly, I'm sick and tired of judgements.
He said, she said, we never know the truth and why should we? Is it because we
have become a world obsessed by gossip. And what about one man's vice is
another mans virtue? For instance, a devout Catholic may find divorce an
abhorition to the word of God, but to a Pagan it may simply mean moving on in lifes
lessons.
Ok, said my peace, not trying to prolong the argument, but I had to get that
out.
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
jana@... writes:
> That's crap! If a person is living in the public eye - they should behaveOh boy, I feel myself tensing up at this one. I fully comprehend what you are
> accordingly. Would it have killed Tom Cruise to quietly talk w/ Nicole? Would
> it have killed him to respect her? Couldn't he have used discretion and
> patience? Did he have to let her know long distance?
saying Jana, my issue is that unless you are Nicoles sister, mother or best
friend, how would you know what actually transpired? Even then stories are
often skewed to make one party appear in better light than the other. I mean just
because People or Rolling Stone say something doesn't make it the full story.
Besides which, when they made that stupid flick together, which title escapes
me now, where they were the married couple and he got into that alternative
sex scene, it became public that they got a sex therapist to help them with
those parts for the movie. Hello, red flag!!! The day I need someone's help making
love to my husband, I should be aware that we have some issues. That was long
before their break up. Needless to say that she met Tom while he was married
to his first wife, and while he was her leading man in that other stupid flick
they did about race car driving. What goes around, comes around as the saying
goes.
Tom and Nicole's marriage is none of our business just because they are in
the lime light of Hollywood, just as it isn't our business whether the President
is doing an intern or not. Either way it doesn't change anything in my daily
life nor my pocket book. Watch or don't watch, listen or don't listen, vote or
don't vote, spend or don't spend. Frankly, I'm sick and tired of judgements.
He said, she said, we never know the truth and why should we? Is it because we
have become a world obsessed by gossip. And what about one man's vice is
another mans virtue? For instance, a devout Catholic may find divorce an
abhorition to the word of God, but to a Pagan it may simply mean moving on in lifes
lessons.
Ok, said my peace, not trying to prolong the argument, but I had to get that
out.
Rhonda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
glad2bmadly
coyote's corner <jana@...> wrote:
Before I moved here to the boonies and married an organic vegetable farmer, I was an actress/director in NY and Boston. I knew a lot of clebrities. My best friend in acting school was Lisa Roberts, sister to Julia and Eric Roberts. There were lots of others as well.
***** They aren't private people - they gave up some of that right to privacy in their quest to be celebrities****. I promise you, many celebrities are celebrities by default. That is the cross they bear to do their craft, to have the power to get meaty rolls or produce controversial work.
*** I often compare Hollywood to Mt. Olympus. America has it's gods & goddesses of excess - the celebrity.****** Yes, because too many of us thrive on the drama that is created about them in order to sell magazines and tv interviews.
****I believe that there is a sense of "Look what I've achieved. I am special, I am better than these mere mortals....I deserve what ever it is I want because I can pull millions of people into the box office or to the concert hall. These people love me and I am a god!******
Don't you think that there are those who would love to dissect what unschoolers do (and do dissect it) without any real first hand knowledge of what we do, just based upon sensationalized stories? I don't believe that most celebrities think they are "Gods". I think they are often just trying to hang onto some sense of who they are underneath all the bogus identities thrown upon them. Granted they don't always do it very gracefully but I don't think I could either. It can be a rough life. I'm glad to be on a farm with my kids and not there. : )
-Madeline
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Before I moved here to the boonies and married an organic vegetable farmer, I was an actress/director in NY and Boston. I knew a lot of clebrities. My best friend in acting school was Lisa Roberts, sister to Julia and Eric Roberts. There were lots of others as well.
***** They aren't private people - they gave up some of that right to privacy in their quest to be celebrities****. I promise you, many celebrities are celebrities by default. That is the cross they bear to do their craft, to have the power to get meaty rolls or produce controversial work.
*** I often compare Hollywood to Mt. Olympus. America has it's gods & goddesses of excess - the celebrity.****** Yes, because too many of us thrive on the drama that is created about them in order to sell magazines and tv interviews.
****I believe that there is a sense of "Look what I've achieved. I am special, I am better than these mere mortals....I deserve what ever it is I want because I can pull millions of people into the box office or to the concert hall. These people love me and I am a god!******
Don't you think that there are those who would love to dissect what unschoolers do (and do dissect it) without any real first hand knowledge of what we do, just based upon sensationalized stories? I don't believe that most celebrities think they are "Gods". I think they are often just trying to hang onto some sense of who they are underneath all the bogus identities thrown upon them. Granted they don't always do it very gracefully but I don't think I could either. It can be a rough life. I'm glad to be on a farm with my kids and not there. : )
-Madeline
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 6/1/03 2:53:47 PM, jana@... writes:
<< What some of them can do IS pretty special. There was a Carol King show
on
PBS last night and she's pretty damned special. Should she get to have
whatever piano she wants to have on stage and not have to move it around by
herself?
What is Carol King's responsibility?
Sandra
<< What some of them can do IS pretty special. There was a Carol King show
on
PBS last night and she's pretty damned special. Should she get to have
whatever piano she wants to have on stage and not have to move it around by
herself?
>>>>>>>>>We aren't talking of her schlepping her piano around. We arespeaking of respect and responsibility.<<<<<<<<< >>
What is Carol King's responsibility?
Sandra
Mary
From: "coyote's corner" <jana@...>
<<I am very disgusted w/ Tom Cruise. According to an interview w/ Nicole
Kidman, she knew they were having problems, but she had been assured and she
believed that the problems were not major. As a matter of fact - the
interior design for their newest home was - she thought - the biggest
problem.
He dumped her - in full view of the world.>>
I do understand what you are saying. But again I would just like for people
to see that there is so much more to people's lives that what we see. I'll
get personal here to try and prove a point. My first marriage ended with me,
after 10 years saying I needed out. Just took off and moved to my moms and 6
months later moved in with a younger guy. Looked pretty slimy because my ex
was lamenting about me leaving and taking his child and how much he loved me
and we were his whole life. His family, my family and all our friends
couldn't understand why I did what I did. I was a pretty private person. I
kept my problems to myself and the therapist. I was trying for 2 years to
get him to go to counselling with me. And I do mean 2 years. I was begging
for him to realize we had a problem. He was not helpful, understanding,
supportive or respectful "of me." To everyone else he was a great guy. He
really was. When I just didn't love him anymore after 2 exasperating years,
I left. Everyone, absolutely everyone was shocked. We had such a perfect
marriage. To everyone else but us. I looked like the bad guy. It wasn't
until years later and through therapy I realized I was abused. Not
physically, but getting hit would have been easier for me than what he was
doing. One just never knows what goes on behind closed doors. (didn't mean
to sound like a CW song)
<<If a person is living in the public eye - they should behave accordingly.
Would it have killed Tom Cruise to quietly talk w/ Nicole? Would it have
killed him to respect her? Couldn't he have used discretion and patience?
Did he have to let her know long distance? Couldn't he have waited before
jumping into the limelight w/ Penelope Cruz? And her....look at her
record...she's had an affair w/ most of her leading men? What does all of
this say about her?>>
I do agree that people in the public do have some responsibility to act
differently in public. I've heard public people even say the same thing. If
they can't handle it, then get out. I also believe that "stars" get paid
ridiculous amounts of money for what they do. I love a good actor and
appreciate their ability. I could never do that. But a million dollars or
more for one movie? I think that's excessive. And I also think that goes
hand in hand with what they think of themselves and how they act. But again,
private lives and what and how they do it are something different. You use
Tom Cruise as an example. He probably could have been more respectful and
patient. But again we don't know the whole story and maybe he just had
enough and didn't know any other way to get out. Maybe he is just a
slimeball, but we can't say either for sure unless we know him. And P. Cruz,
did she really have affairs with most of her leading men or just go out with
them or have her picture taken? Was she bedding them all? I don't see where
star public behavior really says a lot about them at all.
Mary B
<<I am very disgusted w/ Tom Cruise. According to an interview w/ Nicole
Kidman, she knew they were having problems, but she had been assured and she
believed that the problems were not major. As a matter of fact - the
interior design for their newest home was - she thought - the biggest
problem.
He dumped her - in full view of the world.>>
I do understand what you are saying. But again I would just like for people
to see that there is so much more to people's lives that what we see. I'll
get personal here to try and prove a point. My first marriage ended with me,
after 10 years saying I needed out. Just took off and moved to my moms and 6
months later moved in with a younger guy. Looked pretty slimy because my ex
was lamenting about me leaving and taking his child and how much he loved me
and we were his whole life. His family, my family and all our friends
couldn't understand why I did what I did. I was a pretty private person. I
kept my problems to myself and the therapist. I was trying for 2 years to
get him to go to counselling with me. And I do mean 2 years. I was begging
for him to realize we had a problem. He was not helpful, understanding,
supportive or respectful "of me." To everyone else he was a great guy. He
really was. When I just didn't love him anymore after 2 exasperating years,
I left. Everyone, absolutely everyone was shocked. We had such a perfect
marriage. To everyone else but us. I looked like the bad guy. It wasn't
until years later and through therapy I realized I was abused. Not
physically, but getting hit would have been easier for me than what he was
doing. One just never knows what goes on behind closed doors. (didn't mean
to sound like a CW song)
<<If a person is living in the public eye - they should behave accordingly.
Would it have killed Tom Cruise to quietly talk w/ Nicole? Would it have
killed him to respect her? Couldn't he have used discretion and patience?
Did he have to let her know long distance? Couldn't he have waited before
jumping into the limelight w/ Penelope Cruz? And her....look at her
record...she's had an affair w/ most of her leading men? What does all of
this say about her?>>
I do agree that people in the public do have some responsibility to act
differently in public. I've heard public people even say the same thing. If
they can't handle it, then get out. I also believe that "stars" get paid
ridiculous amounts of money for what they do. I love a good actor and
appreciate their ability. I could never do that. But a million dollars or
more for one movie? I think that's excessive. And I also think that goes
hand in hand with what they think of themselves and how they act. But again,
private lives and what and how they do it are something different. You use
Tom Cruise as an example. He probably could have been more respectful and
patient. But again we don't know the whole story and maybe he just had
enough and didn't know any other way to get out. Maybe he is just a
slimeball, but we can't say either for sure unless we know him. And P. Cruz,
did she really have affairs with most of her leading men or just go out with
them or have her picture taken? Was she bedding them all? I don't see where
star public behavior really says a lot about them at all.
Mary B
[email protected]
In a message dated 6/1/2003 5:55:43 PM Central Daylight Time, Unschooling-
"> I don't believe that most celebrities think they are "Gods". I think
they are often
"> I don't believe that most celebrities think they are "Gods". I think
they are often
> just trying to hang onto some sense of who they are underneath all the[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> bogus identities thrown upon them. Granted they don't always do it very
> gracefully but I don't think I could either>"
>
> Well said.
> I believe that most people are doing the best they can at any given moment
> with the tools they have.
> Some people have really poor tools, but they're still doing the best they
> can.
> Celebrities are just people, and like the rest of us, they have feelings and
> don't deserve to be judged so harshly on what could be false information.
>
> Ren
Robyn Coburn
One thing I did like was Nicole on Oprah, saying that she didn't want to
go into details about the breakup because her children would be able to
read it in the media in the future, and Tom was still their father.
Reading what seem like details from odd sources makes me wonder how much
of it is genuine and not just speculation or subjective. I think that as
celebrities get older most of them get more circumspect than when they
were young and hungry for publicity to help their rise. It seems like
many of the celebs who are "media shy" have had a bad experience of
being misquoted or manipulated in some early interview. Perhaps they
didn't realize how others saw them, and the "truth" as the reporter saw
it, upset them. One responsibility that celebrities have is to be
gracious to members of the public whenever possible. The old stars were
taught that I think, and accepted it as part of the territory. But
reporters weren't climbing trees with zoom lenses in the same way
either. (Well maybe Hedda Hopper figuratively speaking).
What responsibility celebrities have to the world in general, and the
use and abuse of access to the media, are some issues I have been
thinking about a lot since the Gulf War began. I haven't any answer yet,
and I'm glad I wasn't a contestant in Miss America (or whatever pageant
it was) recently when one of the questions was "should celebrities use
their status to speak out on political issues". I think this is a
question that anyone who has access to the media will probably consider
- even if vaguely, say along the lines of: "What an idiot that guy is."
Another issue I have pondered for a long time, is how an artist's
political stance and their private personality affects their work,
whether it is or should be relevant or not (Picasso's "Guernica" is not
lessened just because he was a misogynist dickhead - or is it???) This
first came up for me when my enjoyment of Jane Austen was severely
curtailed in 10th grade, by our English teacher giving us a lengthy
expose on the absence of the underclasses and lack of critique of social
inequities in "Persuasion" and others. This brought up the question of
whether an artist always has the mandate to seek social change in their
work. It took me a few years after leaving school to get to back to
enjoying Austen. I notice that many of the movie representations seek to
address this glaring problem in her work by having servants in the
backgrounds.
When I was in college studying Creative Arts (what USA would call Fine
Arts) one of the topics lectured about was that "Is All Art Political?"
I remember it was a bit circuitous - begging the question if Art is
first defined as a political statement, as it was by some of the
teachers.
Robyn Coburn
-----Original Message-----
From: starsuncloud@... [mailto:starsuncloud@...]
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 4:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Unschooling-dotcom] judgemental; celebrities and standards
In a message dated 6/1/2003 5:55:43 PM Central Daylight Time,
Unschooling-
"> I don't believe that most celebrities think they are "Gods". I think
they are often
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705
081972:HM/A=1482387/R=0/SIG=16n70agm4/*http:/ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLm
Rhd=1054511013%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050819
72:HM/A=1482387/R=1=1054511013%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egro
upweb/S=1705081972:HM/A=1482387/R=2>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1482387/rand=926101799>
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email
the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list
owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address
an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
go into details about the breakup because her children would be able to
read it in the media in the future, and Tom was still their father.
Reading what seem like details from odd sources makes me wonder how much
of it is genuine and not just speculation or subjective. I think that as
celebrities get older most of them get more circumspect than when they
were young and hungry for publicity to help their rise. It seems like
many of the celebs who are "media shy" have had a bad experience of
being misquoted or manipulated in some early interview. Perhaps they
didn't realize how others saw them, and the "truth" as the reporter saw
it, upset them. One responsibility that celebrities have is to be
gracious to members of the public whenever possible. The old stars were
taught that I think, and accepted it as part of the territory. But
reporters weren't climbing trees with zoom lenses in the same way
either. (Well maybe Hedda Hopper figuratively speaking).
What responsibility celebrities have to the world in general, and the
use and abuse of access to the media, are some issues I have been
thinking about a lot since the Gulf War began. I haven't any answer yet,
and I'm glad I wasn't a contestant in Miss America (or whatever pageant
it was) recently when one of the questions was "should celebrities use
their status to speak out on political issues". I think this is a
question that anyone who has access to the media will probably consider
- even if vaguely, say along the lines of: "What an idiot that guy is."
Another issue I have pondered for a long time, is how an artist's
political stance and their private personality affects their work,
whether it is or should be relevant or not (Picasso's "Guernica" is not
lessened just because he was a misogynist dickhead - or is it???) This
first came up for me when my enjoyment of Jane Austen was severely
curtailed in 10th grade, by our English teacher giving us a lengthy
expose on the absence of the underclasses and lack of critique of social
inequities in "Persuasion" and others. This brought up the question of
whether an artist always has the mandate to seek social change in their
work. It took me a few years after leaving school to get to back to
enjoying Austen. I notice that many of the movie representations seek to
address this glaring problem in her work by having servants in the
backgrounds.
When I was in college studying Creative Arts (what USA would call Fine
Arts) one of the topics lectured about was that "Is All Art Political?"
I remember it was a bit circuitous - begging the question if Art is
first defined as a political statement, as it was by some of the
teachers.
Robyn Coburn
-----Original Message-----
From: starsuncloud@... [mailto:starsuncloud@...]
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 4:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Unschooling-dotcom] judgemental; celebrities and standards
In a message dated 6/1/2003 5:55:43 PM Central Daylight Time,
Unschooling-
"> I don't believe that most celebrities think they are "Gods". I think
they are often
> just trying to hang onto some sense of who they are underneath all thevery
> bogus identities thrown upon them. Granted they don't always do it
> gracefully but I don't think I could either>"moment
>
> Well said.
> I believe that most people are doing the best they can at any given
> with the tools they have.they
> Some people have really poor tools, but they're still doing the best
> can.feelings and
> Celebrities are just people, and like the rest of us, they have
> don't deserve to be judged so harshly on what could be falseinformation.
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Ren
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705
081972:HM/A=1482387/R=0/SIG=16n70agm4/*http:/ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLm
Rhd=1054511013%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050819
72:HM/A=1482387/R=1=1054511013%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egro
upweb/S=1705081972:HM/A=1482387/R=2>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1482387/rand=926101799>
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email
the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list
owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address
an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Fetteroll
on 6/1/03 7:07 PM, Mary at mummy124@... wrote:
But if a picture makes $100 million, who should get it? It's the actors and
director (and sometimes the special effects people ;-) who are pretty much
responsible for whether the movie brings in money or not.
Their pay is in relation to what the studios expect to make off of their
work.
Same with sports figures. Everyone complains about how much they make, but
the franchises are bringing in huge amounts of money. Advertisers and
consumers are the ones responsible for giving them all the money in the
first place. So where should it go? It's not like anyone holds a gun to
someone's head and makes them pay $200 for a jacket with a licensed image on
it, or makes them pay $1.6 million for 30 seconds of air time during the
Superbowl.
Joyce
> I love a good actor andIt's obscene how much money some people make.
> appreciate their ability. I could never do that. But a million dollars or
> more for one movie? I think that's excessive.
But if a picture makes $100 million, who should get it? It's the actors and
director (and sometimes the special effects people ;-) who are pretty much
responsible for whether the movie brings in money or not.
Their pay is in relation to what the studios expect to make off of their
work.
Same with sports figures. Everyone complains about how much they make, but
the franchises are bringing in huge amounts of money. Advertisers and
consumers are the ones responsible for giving them all the money in the
first place. So where should it go? It's not like anyone holds a gun to
someone's head and makes them pay $200 for a jacket with a licensed image on
it, or makes them pay $1.6 million for 30 seconds of air time during the
Superbowl.
Joyce
Mary
From: "Fetteroll" <fetteroll@...>
<<But if a picture makes $100 million, who should get it? It's the actors
and
director (and sometimes the special effects people ;-) who are pretty much
responsible for whether the movie brings in money or not.>>
For starters I would say some of the people that hardly get acknowledged
that do work on the sets. People that are there a lot longer than the
"stars" and work their butts off. Costumers, make up artists, grips,
caterers, etc. I really think they deserve more than they get. They also can
get the bad end of the starts temperaments too.
As far as the rest, I'm not sure really. In sports I think some of the
players do deserve some of the money they get. If nothing else, their health
is put on the line more than some of us. I've seen older football starts.
They can be pretty crippled up. I know no one makes them do it, but it's
something they love and I think turning pro makes them play a little longer
than they would normally. I mean it's their job and it's scary to have to
quit.
Sure would be nice if they could set up some kind of cap on major money
makers and have them donate a percentage. So many charities out there could
benefit. That will never happen though.
Mary B
<<But if a picture makes $100 million, who should get it? It's the actors
and
director (and sometimes the special effects people ;-) who are pretty much
responsible for whether the movie brings in money or not.>>
For starters I would say some of the people that hardly get acknowledged
that do work on the sets. People that are there a lot longer than the
"stars" and work their butts off. Costumers, make up artists, grips,
caterers, etc. I really think they deserve more than they get. They also can
get the bad end of the starts temperaments too.
As far as the rest, I'm not sure really. In sports I think some of the
players do deserve some of the money they get. If nothing else, their health
is put on the line more than some of us. I've seen older football starts.
They can be pretty crippled up. I know no one makes them do it, but it's
something they love and I think turning pro makes them play a little longer
than they would normally. I mean it's their job and it's scary to have to
quit.
Sure would be nice if they could set up some kind of cap on major money
makers and have them donate a percentage. So many charities out there could
benefit. That will never happen though.
Mary B
[email protected]
>They are harassed daily by the media and the things done to themLike what?
>would be ILLEGAL if they were done to us.
I can't think of any legal harassment that could happen to them that would
not also be legal if it happened to little-old-me.
HeidiWD
Well, I was thinking specifically of this little item:
2) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses
another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first
degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
But because it's done by the media, it's legal.
If someone followed you, pried at your life and wouldn't leave you alone, it
would be considered stalking.
But because a person is famous, and considered newsworthy, that suddenly
brings us back to constitutional rights. It doesn't make it right though.
Ren
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]