Saturday, July 4, 2009

A Contrast

First let me say I'm probably as ignorant as a person can be about who is who is the world of stardom. I do not keep up with those people or what they are doing generally speaking. Our breakroom tables are FULL of magazines that tell every detail of the lives of "stars". My co-workers read them. When I walk in, I generally turn them face down (unobtrusively) so I won't have to even see how they are dressed or whatever other sensational pose they have been caught in. I went to Friends of the Library and bought some old copies of Family Circle and such like and spread them around so I could find something else to read on breaks.

BUT

This week there was a copy of Good Housekeeping there and I was reading it. I started with the introduction which included an explanation of why they had put The Jonas Brothers on their cover. (To me the people on the cover were just another family.) I do not know who The Jonas Brothers are but I liked the explanation:

"We've been watching Nick, Joe, and Kevin Jonas (and their parents) for a couple of years as they've catapulted to superstardom--while remaining remarkably centered and unaffected. Particularly after seeing other young celebs crash and burn over the past few years, we wanted to find out more about the kids who haven't-- and about how their parents managed that."


I decided to read what they had found out.

I'm not going to recount the whole article but I thought one part of it was worth repeating. It was the part that told how they had decided to raise their children. This was their motivation:

"We wanted [everyone] to feel joy in the presence of our children. To me, there's nothing more frustrating than being around a child who's annoying. We taught our kids proper manners."

Their mother's methods: CONSISTENCY, BOUNDARIES, AND CONSTANTLY "reinforcing good conduct until it was behavior". Because THEY ARE GOING TO BE ADULTS A LOT LONGER THAN THEY'RE CHILDREN." Even now she holds a hard line on manners; it's the key way she keeps them grounded while they're surrounded by a world of glitz.
" page 3


The thought I got from what they said was that by insisting that your children behave while they are young, you are going to prepare them for adult life-- and they will be adults longer than they will be children. Kids who are not allowed to be brats--inconsiderate of others and rude-- are not as likely to grow up to be "bratty" adults.

I couldn't help but think of the contrast between their lives and the life of Michael Jackson. Like I say, I do NOT keep up with these people. but the little I've gleaned from the EXTENSIVE news reports since his death do not give the idea that he had the same type of upbringing. Seemingly much of what he did revolved around just wanting to have had a loving, decent childhood.

But the great tragedy of his life was that his position of King of Pop did not give him the main thing he wanted in life. He wanted friends he could love and trust and he wanted the real love he felt he has missed from his family life growing up. He was paranoid-- probably rightfully so-- that most of the people surrounding him did not care about him, only his money. A life of uppers and downers and no real friends.

He overspent and, consequently, was in financial straits and so he agreed to a tour that would help him--one he felt he could manage. But he was not able to control the fact that it grew and grew and grew to proportions that he knew he was not physically able to handle. The word seems to be that he was trying to make himself sick enough to have a legitimate excuse to renege on his contract.

As I listened to the 911 call that was made to get help to him, I thought: It doesn't matter that he's "the king of pop", it doesn't matter that he is famous and has so many fans. It doesn't matter what he's done. Having a personal physician with him at all times did not help him. He was gone and they were frantically trying to get some skilled people there to restore his life, but they could do nothing. His fame meant nothing. His money meant nothing.

It was over.

.

1 comment:

Vondi said...

How very true that is! He died alone, in spite of all he tried to surround himself by. Man seems to be so convinced that he can control every aspect of life and nature. Then he is confronted with something like this that no amount of money or knowledge or know-how can change. And it’s sad And what is even more heartbreaking is the fact that he died without God. How very, very desolate.