"Oh shit, I'm in trouble now."
Kristen Stewart, as we have previously established, is great. In part, she is great because she is fairly unvarnished; in this era of cultivated and micromanaged Disney stars, it's great to hear from her because she doesn't appear to have a giant press-management-industrial-complex clanking behind her at all times (which is all the more remarkable given that she's under contract with Summit Entertainment, which is basically run by Darth Vader and Lou Pearlman). But there is a reason that pure beings like K. Stew don't last very long: we can't deal with them. By we, I don't mean you and me. I mean the rest of America. We find some way to destroy them, some way to squeeze them back into the molds we find acceptable. And they can't be contained by those molds! They get crushed.
So in an interview with Elle, Kristen Stewart likened the intrusive nature of the paparazzi to rape. Even out of context, it doesn't take an idiot to see that she did not mean "being followed by the paparazzi is exactly like rape, it is of the exact same magnitude and is exactly as bad as actually getting raped," but that seems to be how some people have taken her comments.
FOX News has the story that several groups are now criticizing Stewart for her comments. If you want to see a little bit of authorial bias in action, note that the specific groups don't get mentioned until the seventh paragraph. Until then Stewart is being condemned by a kind of amorphous Everyone, which is a great way to condemn Stewart yourself if you are an intrepid and judgmental reporter at Fox News. Similarly:
It sure takes that sentiment a long time to get attributed to somebody, doesn't it? I understand that part of this is politics. A celebrity mentions rape and every non-profit director tries to get quoted in a story to increase visibility; this is half of the reason most groups ever get offended about anything. That isn't to say that rape activists don't do important work. But it's a tough gamble, playing this game. When PETA gets angry about Obama killing a fly they increase their visibility but lose credibility. It almost seems like the American desire to get famous for something, anything has even bled into organizations of people. It takes root in collective consciousness.
Kristen Stewart is probably going to have to apologize, which is dumb. Rape is a serious crime; such a serious crime that basically nothing anyone can ever say ever will diminish its seriousness to anyone. Stewart's apology, if it happens, will just feed into this unfortunate fake-outrage trend and will generally strike a blow for freedom of colorful speech. Not that I think she should stand strong; Kristen Stewart doesn't have to champion the cause of being allowed to make rape analogies for me to respect her. It's just as much a waste of time to defend it as it to attack it in the first place.
I understand on some level that there is a measure of hypocrisy to me talking about this, since in the past I have mocked at length the right wing trend of comparing things to Hitler. Obviously those right wingers don't mean that Obama is exactly like Hitler, that his actions are of equal magnitude. The major difference is that these people endlessly compare things to Hitler; see Lewis Black's Daily Show piece about how Glenn Beck has Nazi Tourette's. There's also a more subtle rhetorical difference in that their rhetoric is designed to force associations between Obama and Hitler to feed and flavor general discontent, to channel it in a specific direction. That is not what Kristen Stewart is doing. But you probably already knew that.
I would also like to tell Margaret Lazarus of rapels.org to make sure she understands the context of a quote before stepping in front of a microphone:
“Rape is a violation in which one has no choice. A star seeking publicity has choices,” Lazarus told Fox411.com. “Although rape involves loss of privacy, loss of privacy does not constitute rape. Let's use a little logical thinking here.”
This is first of all based on a kind of realpolitik understanding of Hollywood and publicity as part and parcel to the art form of acting, which is true but still kind of unfair. "A star seeking publicity," doesn't exactly conjure the warmest image in your mind, does it? It's not like Summit forced Elle to interview Stewart, either. The magazine has as much to gain as anyone else, if not more. But Stewart was talking more about the aggressive and rude behavior of the photographers, the nightmare of avoiding them. And when we talk about Kristen Stewart we're not talking about avoiding them on the way to a club, we're talking about avoiding them by not walking near the windows in your house. Lazarus would be right in any other situation. She still is sort of right. But less right than she could be.
Thoughts?
14 comments:
I think she's an idiot. Every job has it's downside. Her job's downside is she gets photographed even when she doesn't want to be. The upside is she makes millions of dollars for doing a piss-poor acting job and at times doesn't have to work for months. The upside of my job is I get to help people and the downside is as a complaint officer, I'm being yelled at by people all day long. Deal with it. Clearly, Kristen Stewart has never been raped. And if she hates being a celebrity so much, she should shut up and get a real job.
i recently posted a comment VERY similar to amanda's, though slightly less acidic, on a videogum discussion about k. stew. i felt like all her glumness and refusing to at least pretend like she was happy to be at her press junkets was really ungrateful. i pointed out that if she wanted to just focus on acting, without dealing with the publicity, she should look into joining a community theatre troop or something.
now, as a bit of a stew-head, and a more compassionate person than i was roughly 6 months ago, i feel differently.
k. stew and all the twilight people sign on to star in these movies. they also agree to attend publicity events. they do not sign contracts that give the entire world full access to them 24 hrs a day. they get paid to do a job, which, like modeling or any other job that seems super easy, is probably much more difficult and stressful than anyone on the outside can fully appreciate. they get handsomely compensated for it - more handsomely than the difficulty level really deserves, but not more handsomely than the studio heads, who don't personally make the movies but reap HUGE benefits from the hard work of the entire cast and crew.
it's easy for me, and for anyone else, to tell her she should quit bitching and suck it up. i have before and it was very easy! but i also don't know how hard it would be to be a private person, who is maybe painfully shy, and be forced to pretend like it was super fine with you to be screamed at by strangers all the fucking time. i can imagine, even for an outgoing gadfly like myself, that that level of attention would take its toll.
she isn't complaining about the interviews or the appearances. she's complaining about the photographers who follow her EVERYWHERE, all the time. that level of invasion of privacy, against your will, that is unrelenting, seems like a serious fucking violation of the sanctity of one's mental and physical body.
saying she should shut up because it's her job to deal with this is like saying rape victims are asking for it being dressed in revealing clothes. wearing a short skirt and heels shouldn't mean you have to accept the possibility that you might be raped, and signing on to star in a big movie shouldn't mean you have to accept the possibility that you'll never be able to live a normal life again.
I got that issue of Elle yesterday. While I did sort of do a double take at her comment, I don't think she did it maliciously nor was she trying to say they were the same thing. She never said "Having photographers hound me is exactly like being raped" or anything like that. She said "I feel like I'm looking at someone being raped" in regards to the photos. Should she have used a different analogy? Yeah, probably. Should she be put through the ringer because she mis-spoke? No. Let her apologize for putting her foot in her mouth a bit and move on.
People throw around the word rape quite a lot in comparisons, such as "Oh, I was just raped by that test." The public doesn't demand an apology every time a regular person says it. My classmate didn't have Fox News hounding him when he compared the test to rape. Personally, I find that comparison more offensive than what she said. I think it comes down to the idea that the public feels that words spoken by celebrities somehow have more importance, more meaning than those spoken by anyone else. Which is really stupid because exactly what qualifications does a 20 year old actress have to make her words so much more powerful than anyone else's?
As far as the seeking publicity subject, yes some celebrities do that. And sure, you can argue that if they didn't want that they wouldn't be in the business. But, on the other hand, just because they chose a public career doesn't mean that every other aspect of their lives should be public. How fair is it to force someone to choose between getting paid to do something they love (which I'll argue is the dream of almost everyone) and getting to live their lives with a little privacy and a lack of being stalked? I remember reading a quote by an actor once, and I'm totally drawing a blank on who, where he said something to the effect that we don't expect to know every detail of our doctor's lives. We just expect him to do a good job. So why should we expect anything out of an actor other than a good performance?
Oh, and aside from the whole rape comment craziness, that article totally made me want to give her a hug.
I'm not sure I agree with your last rape-analogy, Kira, but I will defend to the death your right to make rape analogies! Amanda-- I think part of my problem is that I am working from a sort of Platonic Ideal of what acting should be, and Kira, you were right on some level in that Stewart should just do community theater and work at a grocery store or something.
Of course, she was a child actress, and her parents are in "the business," so it's hard to feel like she necessarily had a choice. And maybe someday Stewart WILL get out of Hollywood and she and Robert Pattinson will start a new incarnation of Rilo Kiley.
And I think our tabloid culture is driven by something other than just the business of acting; how do you explain people like Paris Hilton, who is tabloid famous for no reason at all? How do you explain the fact that most directors don't get hounded by paparazzi? Most ACTORS, even? What do you know about Kat Dennings? I read an interview with Idris Elba where he talked about finding that balance-- being one of those celebrities that no one knew anything about (Idris Elba is a man of very specific ambitions, which is part of the reason he seems to distance himself from his role on THE WIRE, which is kind of unfathomable to me.) I think he was talking about how Denzel Washington is so famous, and yet, what do we know about Denzel? Nothing.
Most of the time tabloid targets seems to happen at random. It is not a direct and obvious consequence of becoming famous; it happens to the unluckiest celebrities, and their tabloid fame becomes self-perpetuating. The deal is not you get to do this thing you love, and sacrifice your privacy in exchange. If the stakes were that clear it would be difficult to forgive Kristen Stewart. But that isn't how it works.
I agree that rape metaphors in general, like Hitler metaphors, are generally to be avoided, if only for stylistic reasons. I usually say "I fucked that test in the face." That's actually not true-- I usually say "I think I did okay on that test." But if I was the kind of person who was ever anything but incredibly paranoid about my academic progress I would say that and not the rape thing.
I'm a little out of my depth here anyway-- my penis is like a rhetorical flotation device. How's THAT for an analogy?
I am of the longstanding opinion that very rarely do I need to feel sorry for rich people or attractive teenagers. Don't take that as criticism. I still like reading your blog.
-suzette
You guys have all made a lot of really good, thoughtful comments about this already, but I may as well throw in a few more ideas.
People are such overreactors (is that a word?) on both sides of this story. Look, I get very uncomfortable, sometimes, seeing some of these paparazzi photos on gossip blogs. On more than one occasion the person in the photo has had a look of complete and utter helplessness, "please just leave me alone" plainly visible on his or her face. And then I feel guilty about going to the site. Have you seen some of the videos of stars being pursued by paparazzi? I tried to find a good one of a recent KStew incident where a bunch of photographers were literally falling over each other to get pictures of her going through the airport, but couldn't find the original one, only edited versions. It's brutal. I can't imagine how it must feel to know that 85% of the time you are getting into or out of a car someone is trying to take your picture. God forbid you should have coffee with someone, it will be everywhere. While I realize she has what many of us would consider a dream job, the lack of personal privacy is a lot to give up if you aren't the type of person who thrives off of that attention.
As far as the "quit acting and get a real job" comments, how many artists or performing artists that you know are suited for anything other than their chosen path? I know quite a few musicians and artists and very few of them are monetarily successful at what they do, but it's in their makeup. When they're doing anything but music or painting they're miserable. I don't know many actors, but I would imagine it's the same sort of thing for them.
All of that being said, she made a poor word choice. And yes, she was incredibly difficult during that first round of Twilight promotion appearances. I remember watching the Letterman appearance before I was a fan and thinking "she is never going to be invited back on that show." However, if it was being ungrateful or just being a pretentious 18 year old who felt that she had done all of these "better" movies and now was famous for doing "trash" (I know, I'm projecting) I'm not really sure. She has come around, though, and was a completely different person for New Moon and subsequent interviews.
I don't know. If I were her, I would be a lot less forthcoming in future interviews. And that blows, because I actually like to read interviews where people aren't afraid to express an opinion.
I think its really dumb that people are getting mad at her for saying it. I mean would it have made a difference if she HAD been raped? Would that make it ok for her to say it?
I mean its kinda like if someone said, "Man were getting killed out there" and then all of the relatives of people who've been killed or murdered get all offended. They aren't actually getting killed and murder is not something to take lightly (as is rape) but u dont see people getting all mad when other people say that.
I think people are just overreacting to something small and insignificant. I suppose she could have said something different but she didnt, and I think they should just get over it and not make a huge deal out of it.
I started responding to comments then felt bad about not replying to all of them, so I did. My thoughts are down there somewhere.
Amanda: Your every job has its downside analogy doesn't work for me in this case. If you leave your job, those people will not follow you to your next job and continue to complain. If K.Stewart quit acting today, the paparazzi would likely continue to follow her for some time, in fact it might be worse as she'd have less people around to protect her from them.
Kira: I actually like your last analogy. In the same way those women are not asking to be raped. No one with any level of fame is asking to basically be stalked for the rest of their lives (or until the next big phenomenon).
Kim: Celebs' words are always regarded as more important. It has to do with the pedestal society places them on.
Zac: You've been discussing Twilight with a group of women for quite a while. You must have acclimated to this depth at least a little.
Suzanne: I can see your point and agree that they shouldn't be given any more sympathy than anyone else in that same position.
Rosanne: I had a friend who was an actor. After the show he'd been hosting was canceled, he did not do well with the switch to regular jobs. He decided his friends needed to take the place of his fans and worship the ground he walked upon then that he was too good for most of us anyway. I wasn't sad to see him go.
I've never really understood the draw of tabloids or the obsession with celebrities. They're just people. I can understand taking photos at an event or on a movie set but when someone can't even step one foot outside their door to get the mail without it ending up on a dozen websites it crosses a line. Kristen seems like the kind of person who, while she doesn't always enjoy doing events and interviews, knows those are a part of her job but the rest of the time just wants to be herself. None of us are in her position so we can't understand what it's like. Maybe to her it didn’t seem like a bad analogy. Rape is about control and violation. When every move you make is going to be scrutinized, you probably do feel somewhat controlled because what you want to do may not be what you want the public to see you doing and your privacy is violated. I'm not saying it make her statement any more acceptable and of course the general public, especially those who want press for themselves will take it to mean something worse but likely to Kristen it was apt.
Sorry, I was typing and missed someone.
MusicallyInclined: That is a good point and also works for people whose friends or relatives are murderers. Both are horrible crimes but for some reason murder is more culturally acceptable to joke about or make analogies with than rape.
renee, i liked what you said at the end. to her, it felt like an apt comparison. she didn't directly equate them, but to her, the level of invasion and violation was comparable, i assume on an emotional or mental level. i hope that if she issues an apology, it's a tepid one.
"i'm sorry if what i said was offensive to some people. i stand by my words. BOOYAH." - the press release i will write for k. stew.
suzette, i'm bummed about your suggestion that rich, attractive or stupid (teenagers) people are undeserving of compassion, and SUPER tempted to write a long comment filled with buddhist gooey-love stuff, but i'm gonna let it go.
awesome hustle, guys. very impressive discussion.
Sorry, ninjaxtea, but most of that was a little beyond the pale for this blog. (Get it? Because vampires are pale?) But seriously. REDACTED. Let's all be adults here.
Don't put words in my blog comment, K-spice. I'm down with stupid people. I work with downs-ies. I simply reject the extremely popular opinion that people born with advantages (beauty, wealth) should be given our attention. This absolutely a symptom of helping people overcome 'real' adversity and they're so damn plucky about it. Can you even imagine?
I also view celebrity as classic misdirection and a partial waste of energy. I say partial because I do think it operates well as a social crutch for understanding mores and what is acceptable behavior when working in a setting where people are unfamiliar.
A body walks in to their new temp position and says, "Man, that Lindsay Lohan..."
Maybe the boss replies,"That little slut stabbed me in my appendix!" or MAYBE that new boss screams, "I know! I have ecstasy tablets with her face on themDOYOUWANTONE?"
I remain skeptical that any Westerner could ever fully accept the teachings of "sweetheart babyface" Gautama Buddha.
I'm pretty excited that Renee got my name wrong. People get my name wrong all the time and I always assumed myself a mumbler. Now I see that it cannot possibly be my fault. Unless Renee was using one of those roots that reads the internet to you and that robot mumbled.
I really love the imaginary Zachary Little Twilight placed like a transparency over the original. I have no idea where one ends and the other begins. Zachary Little's Alice is a marvel.
If only Little/Brown would let me do a rewrite, huh?
So, she DID apologize and it goes a little something like this:
"I really made an enormous mistake -- clearly and obviously. And I'm really sorry about my choice of words," Stewart told People magazine..."'Violated' definitely would have been a better way of expressing the thought," she added. "People thinking that I'm insensitive about this subject rips my guts out. I made a big mistake."
And now I can only picture her walking around saying "I've made a huge mistake" like Gob Bluth would.
Post a Comment