Yes, Good looks are a curse. As per this NY Times profile of Olivia Wilde. Oh wait, there's another NYT profile of yet another good looking woman Brit Marling who has to work extra hard to make her mark in Hollywood. Listen kids, don't aspire a career in Hollywood, if you're even remotely good looking. Or prepare to work very hard to go past an ordinary person.
Here's li'l bit of my personal experience. All doors open for good looking people, either men or women. Period. I work in IT, not a glamorous field by any measure. And I've seen many people, whose good looks and charm gave'em li'l push on their way up on corporate ladder. Trust me, there's no such thing called glass ceiling for these people.
Back to the NYT articles, these are the article Headlines.
Look Past the Beauty, if You Can.
How to Succeed in Hollywood Despite Being Really Beautiful.
There was a time, I was naive and I've this impression that all I read in Newspaper or magazines is objective reporting. Slowly I woke up to fact that there's a profession by name Publicist. Whose job is make sure that his/her client gets enough visibility in all the media. Client could be anybody or anything. A new website, app, artist, athlete, tech entrepreneur, VC et al. So the publicists hired by the agencies of Ms.Wilde and Ms.Marling are behind these articles. This doesn't feel good to me but I don't have any problem with this. No harm whatsoever.
But these attention seeking faux headlines makes me cringe. We're talking about Hollywood, where good looks are a pre-requisite. And when was the last time good looks became liability to any actress. This whole argument sounds preposterous to me. Olivia Wilde's profile itself quotes that her parents are influential journalists with beltway contacts and that's how she got a job in a casting agency. So the family background and good looks which gave her a break early in her career are suddenly a liability?
I like Olivia Wilde, saw her on Bill Maher once and found her very informed about social issues. Haven't seen any movie or TV series starring her. I've no idea who the other lady is. I don't have any beef with magazines profiling these artists, whenever their new movie/memoir/music album comes out. My only problem is with these catchy Headlines, these show business reporters come up with. If this article is all about beauty being a bane, then they should've skipped the photoshopped pic. Nope, that wasn't the case.
Being beautiful is not a liability. It never was and never would be. Media should stop using this overplayed meme. Just imagine how many people would recognize Olivia or the other woman, if they haven't inherited that good gene pool. This is show business, not Financial Engineering or Nuclear Science.
Peace.
Here's li'l bit of my personal experience. All doors open for good looking people, either men or women. Period. I work in IT, not a glamorous field by any measure. And I've seen many people, whose good looks and charm gave'em li'l push on their way up on corporate ladder. Trust me, there's no such thing called glass ceiling for these people.
Back to the NYT articles, these are the article Headlines.
Look Past the Beauty, if You Can.
How to Succeed in Hollywood Despite Being Really Beautiful.
There was a time, I was naive and I've this impression that all I read in Newspaper or magazines is objective reporting. Slowly I woke up to fact that there's a profession by name Publicist. Whose job is make sure that his/her client gets enough visibility in all the media. Client could be anybody or anything. A new website, app, artist, athlete, tech entrepreneur, VC et al. So the publicists hired by the agencies of Ms.Wilde and Ms.Marling are behind these articles. This doesn't feel good to me but I don't have any problem with this. No harm whatsoever.
But these attention seeking faux headlines makes me cringe. We're talking about Hollywood, where good looks are a pre-requisite. And when was the last time good looks became liability to any actress. This whole argument sounds preposterous to me. Olivia Wilde's profile itself quotes that her parents are influential journalists with beltway contacts and that's how she got a job in a casting agency. So the family background and good looks which gave her a break early in her career are suddenly a liability?
I like Olivia Wilde, saw her on Bill Maher once and found her very informed about social issues. Haven't seen any movie or TV series starring her. I've no idea who the other lady is. I don't have any beef with magazines profiling these artists, whenever their new movie/memoir/music album comes out. My only problem is with these catchy Headlines, these show business reporters come up with. If this article is all about beauty being a bane, then they should've skipped the photoshopped pic. Nope, that wasn't the case.
Being beautiful is not a liability. It never was and never would be. Media should stop using this overplayed meme. Just imagine how many people would recognize Olivia or the other woman, if they haven't inherited that good gene pool. This is show business, not Financial Engineering or Nuclear Science.
Peace.
No comments:
Post a Comment