ACTING THE PART - ACTORS AS ACTIVISTS

I think a bunch of people in the late 1970's and early 1980's seemed to have decided that people like them, who had read a book or two, were entitled to consider themselves and their friends 'intellectuals'. They somehow must have convinced themselves that they knew a lot more than the general public did. 

They certainly spoke at and to us, in our classrooms and schools and also through the media, as though the rest of us would benefit from their opinions on what parts of our lives would be better after we followed their advice. 

Strangely enough, this fad hit Hollywood too, and around this time, movies such as The China Syndrome (1979) and The Big Chill (1983) and Silkwood (1983) began to be produced. By the time Erin Brockovich (2000) was an Oscar Winner, it was well entrenched and in fact, ubiquitous. 

Perhaps 'Acting School' and some College education made the Actor as Activist who emerged between 1979 and 2000, less peculiar than they would otherwise have been. Unfortunately, reading words somebody else had written for a movie stopped being enough for the movie star. 

The Movie Star as Activist, begun during the Vietnam War, became the thing to be. It was also important to be seen as saying and doing the Politically Correct thing, among their fellow Hollywood actors. Another way to see and be seen presented itself and suddenly we began to see more of them as champions of a variety of 'causes'.  

As a result, a bigger soapbox than ever suddenly became available for whatever 'cause', the group decided to champion whether, pesticide sprays on fruit or more often as time went by, their favourite political party and candidate. 

The actor to be effective had to be someone with a recognizable face, whether successful or not. Somewhere along the way, they decided that a prop was needed to make them appear more serious. They seemed to feel that, donning eyeglasses and a serious facial expression, made them plausible as intellectuals. 

The next step required the actor to begin expressing his 'heartfelt' convictions about something, in whatever medium would let them air their views. While I am certain, various thoughtful and idealistic among them were expressing their concerns and convictions about the world around them, I suspect that all were not motivated by compassion, concern or altruism.

As a strategy for more exposure and influence within Hollywood or even to get more work, it was very successful.  The support of a  popular 'cause' also served to get them 'face time', usually on television. For a few of them, it also meant paid work on documentaries, reading the scripts in front of various 'natural' (outdoors) settings. 

Aspiring stars today, know that to be successful celebrities, they are required to show interests in the world beyond their industry. Earnest explanations for their nudity or bisexuality in a role are no longer enough to demonstrate their commitment to their ‘art’. Now they know they must express empathy and support to those less fortunate than themselves, such as wildlife, selected chronic diseases, or to be seen as caring to the ‘less fortunate’ in distant countries.

Meanwhile, to accompany and serve this caring persona which is now presented by successful celebrities, a whole entertainment and gossip industry has developed to discuss their every word, action, attire, rumour or lifestyle change; normally excluding their addictions and lawless behaviour; unless it proves fatal. 

The earlier group of activist actors, generally was more interested in voicing their personal opinions about various global concerns, than in what to wear. 

Today’s actors, in contrast, need to attract attention by how they look. The public adores and admires them when they are being seen and on display. Appearance disguises whatever weaknesses or reality there is beneath the façade. 

This new group therefore needs to devote considerable time and effort to it in order to be considered successful and look the part. What they say is not as important, with the exception of the names of the clothing and jewellery designer responsible for their ensemble. 

As long as they quickly present the correct causes to their peers in public, once their credentials have been recorded by the media, little more need be done about this, beyond occasional attendance at the appropriate fundraisers. Any false steps are quickly corrected by their publicists who are there to ensure long, lucrative careers.

The earlier group actually wanted their opinions to be out there and be seen as relevant and important, and was not only far less interested in what they were wearing, but possibly even indifferent to such things. 

This culminated with a famous movie actor and also a Director offering to leave the United States, if their choice of president was not elected. Sadly, neither of them, made good on the promise.

Eventually the actor decided to act again and finally resumed and revived his career. Most recently he has taken his comedy very seriously indeed...most profitably. Possibly it was because he started to do what he was good at, 'playing' other people in television and movies, instead of, wild ranting political diatribes. 

This actor's manly visage coupled with his ability to read lines that other people wrote probably helped him too. He revived his career and has gone on to considerable acclaim since he began reading his lines again and gave up the far more difficult job, of thinking...so beyond his abilities.

I think Hollywood learned a valuable lesson, see and be seen, but use whatever talents and gifts you have wisely. Stick to what you are actually good at. The land of the Dream Weavers finally has returned to, what passes for normal in Tinseltown.