Thursday, October 21, 2010

*stumbles onto yet another soapbox*

I really need to watch my step.

I got myself into a slightly warmed over discussion on twitter because I have a big mouth and even bigger opinions.

Thus began the "Celebutard" debate.

SO here, for my seven followers, I will explain my position in full.
Because I am THAT stubborn.

Quickly - a definition of  "celebutard" from Urban Dictionary:
A mash-up of the words "celebrity" and "retarded," the word celebutard refers to any of a crop of famous people (mostly young, mostly filthy rich) who are unable to form complete sentences in a public setting. In fact, they probably couldn't even grasp the concept that "celebutard" is made up of two separate words.
 The really awesome thing is that the usage-in-a-sentence bit just after this used the word "erudition". Sweet. And for the record- I DESPISE the "R" word. But, such as it is, I'm letting it go.

So. This all started based on a debate a friend was having with coworkers about Val Kilmer.

I, personally, am not a fan. He's not my favorite actor (he's had some fabulous moments in his career), but more importantly- I don't like him as a person. I have heard too many horror stories about his nightmare ego and disrespectful attitude to have any respect for him.

I believe in paying your dues. I want to spend my life creating art, on a stage, every day. But I don't want someone to hand it to me. I would absolutely hate if someone gave me a collection of never-produced original songs, new instruments, and a venue and said "have at it, you're a celebrity now". I want to work for it. I want to work in a dingy bar in downtown LA, and send my demo to 40 producers, and work off the same Yamaha keyboard til it falls apart.
But most celebrities that we have now... I won't bother naming names, fill in your favorites here... haven't done any of those things. They get handed their record deal and their clothing line and their nationwide television debut and are instantly the most watched thing on the planet. The problem when this happens is that the "artist" in question doesn't learn how to be in the public eye, and their ego overtakes their passion.

I have great respect for art. Always. I respect artists... almost always. I have seen actors lose their jobs because they were disrespectful to their director or the stagehands or whatever the case may be. As much as I have disagreed with people I have worked with (and will much more, I have no doubt) I have never disrespected them, because I know that's a trust you can't regain. So I don't understand why we don't care how "celebrities" act because we'd rather take the "art" without question. Kanye West, as an example, should have absolutely NO career anymore. He destroyed it not just once, but several times. But we take it anyway. People still buy his stuff and follow him on twitter and listen to what he has to say. He made a mockery of himself and called it an "apology", which I think is a big old "F-you!" to the music community. It's disrespectful. If he wasn't a celebrity, he would have had to work his way back up the ladder, fighting against his ego and reputation. What he did and continues to do through his own attitude and idiocy, is disrespect his own art. If your art is truly what brings you fulfillment, then why would you put it on the line to fuel your ego? I believe in taking chances, and making mistakes - but I also believe in holding art to a higher standard.

So yes, I listen to the Dresden Dolls. They're one of my musical icons and an absolute comfort to me at all times. Genius work by two people I love. But somewhere in the back of my mind I still know what Brian did to Amanda, that led to their break up. I love him as a drummer - but I don't love him quite as deeply as a person. Simple. I still want to see them on tour. I still buy their merchandise. Half of that is because I KNOW they paid their dues, and it shows in the way they carry themselves. They take nothing for granted. His ego got the better of him, and his big-break-band broke up because of it. Yes, he's worked since, but it hasn't captured the same electricity the Dolls used to. He's paying his dues. (And read what he said in regards to the above link, in the "info" panel. He knows he screwed up and he know he was cast with a fittingly bad light).

Maybe I'm contradicting myself. In fact, I'm sure I am. But that's part of it. This isn't as black and white as all that. All I know is, I'd like to not have to ever hear the name "Justin Beiber" again so long as I live, and the fact that he has now released a book makes my stomach hurt. He doesn't know anything about real life. He's a spoiled brat who has said some of the stupidest things I have ever heard anyone say in a very very public forum. If Miley Cyrus wanted to be a celebrity, why doesn't she carry herself as a role model? She knew what she was getting into, and yet it's "not her job" to be someone young girls can look up to... um, yes it is, honey. You signed up for it. You got it a thousand fold. "Growing up" doesn't mean being a slut and "being approachable" doesn't mean being an idiot. You instantly lose my respect.

Now, as I'm writing this, one of the parties of said slightly-more-heated-than-when-I-started-this debate, said that I, YHN, "see the artist as the art" Wrong, says I. I hold them separately. I don't love Lady Gaga, but I appreciate what she's done for pop culture. I love Constantine Maroulis' voice and music, but know he's a real jerk in person. John Mayer is an incredible musician, but isn't so great with being respectful (or smart). Taking it back even further, I love Ben Vereen as a dancer and performer, but know he's also one of the biggest egos to ever make its way onto a stage (same applies to Ann Reinking, oddly enough). I mean... even Bing Crosby abused his kids. There are so many Lindsays, Parises, Britneys... but if I like their art, I will put their ego aside and enjoy it.
My question is- why aren't they expected to do it themselves?

To me, being an artist is about touching people, not yourself. Ya dig?

"Oh, I'm gonna get letters..." -Charles Nelson Reilly

1 comment:

  1. Right on. One doesn't have to like who a person is in order to appreciate what that person does (exactly the opposite of 'seeing the artist as the art', by the way). But one can lose all respect for that person's art if that person's art becomes secondary to that person's ego, lack of self-control or self-respect.
    How there's some other side to argue is beyond me.

    ReplyDelete