Amy Winehouse Enters Rehab!

#16
^^^every other celebrity? you mean every other addict. And American celebrities are no different than anyone else. An addict is an addict. It is a very serious disease that cannot be trivialized as something that only happens to celebs. The success rate for people who go into rehab is only about 5%. The rest relapse. Its not because you are or are not a celeb. Its the disease. Its not right or fair to demonize someone who relapses due to being a celebrity. Getting sober is easy. Staying sober is not. For anyone.
 
#17
It's about time!!!! Frankly though, the Grammy's are probably the last place she needs to go after rehab...and they think 20 days will be enough? IDK....but it's a good first step!
 
#18
twiggers said:
It's about time!!!! Frankly though, the Grammy's are probably the last place she needs to go after rehab...and they think 20 days will be enough? IDK....but it's a good first step!
Click to expand...

20 days!!?? I didn't see that. She needs at least 60 - 90 days. 20 days isn't going to cut it for her. Especially a junkie. oh thats disparaging to hear.
 
#19
I hope she is going by her own choice, and I hope she will seek a new record label. The current one has apparently been telling the press that they are just not going to promote her album blah blah(insert self-serving self-righteous bullcrap here).

So they can primly keep their money in their pockets, secure in the knowledge that the now infamous "crack tape" will promote it waaay better than they could if they sank their last penny in the project.
 
#21
LOL I wish I could disagree with you that they are all the same, and I wish that it were not in such poor taste to point out that depending on the terms of the agreement the label has, deceased addicts with a sizeable amount of material laid down may not be liabilities at all.

You are right of course, that what she needs is a break from pretty much everything, and of course, whether it is Amy or Britney or whoever, business is business and everybody wants a piece of whatever profit can be made from the suffering of their fellow human beings.

But after a steady diet, over the last few weeks, of almost solidly that particular charming feature of our species, I am obliged to rail against it, however pointless.
 
#22
ShimmaPuff said:
LOL I wish I could disagree with you that they are all the same, and I wish that it were not in such poor taste to point out that depending on the terms of the agreement the label has, deceased addicts with a sizeable amount of material laid down may not be liabilities at all.

You are right of course, that what she needs is a break from pretty much everything, and of course, whether it is Amy or Britney or whoever, business is business and everybody wants a piece of whatever profit can be made from the suffering of their fellow human beings.

But after a steady diet, over the last few weeks, of almost solidly that particular charming feature of our species, I am obliged to rail against it, however pointless.
Click to expand...

I feel ya. Believe me, it was very disturbing when an artist was in the hospital, we'd get truckloads of orders for their catalog. But you just have to remember when an artist signs that dotted line, they become a product. They know this. Its crummy but true. And the public are the ones that demand this product be readily available to them when someone dies. Its a vicious circle.
 
#23
^^^ Yeah, the same cycle and producthood I was blabbing about in the paparazzi privacy etc thread - WE are the ones who decide that the pic of Queen Latifa with broccoli teeth is worth so much more than the pretty smile pic, thus effecting that Queen may not enjoy her lunch without 9 squillion photographers just waiting for her to laugh at her companion's bon mot after every bite of salad.

There are even websites that give statistics about futures of autographs etc of different celebrities, and of course whenever one gets sick, whether from measles or mental illness, addiction or arrythmia, there are speculators who start buying the stuff in one window and spiffing up those eBay templates in another... :sad:
 
#25
Another aspect I was musing on, as reflected in a snarky comment I made in the Ringo thing, is history, and how all these scandals today are different only in terms of technology and media.

I'm not aware of any tapes of Janis Joplin doing heroin, and if there were such a thing, I am sure it would have been all over the place by now, but her addiction was no secret back then, no less scandalous to some, no less tragic to others, just as had been the case with our parents in Judy Garland's day, and their parents before them with Lady Day.

Plus ca change, plus ce la meme chose.

So just as the awful racket made by those terrible shaggy-headed Beatles is today acknowledged as some of the finest music ever written, even by youngsters to whom the tunes are as familiar as their ears, but who may not even realize, upon hearing some symphony orchestral rendition of "Hey, Jude," that it is a "Beatles song," so are the tragedies and scandals of yesteryear softened and faded into a romantic etude of suffering genius.

There are no tapes of the scenes that met the eyes of Billie Holiday's band members, back in her dressing room, no one held up a cell phone and recorded what we know must have gone on in Judy Garland's bedroom - and bathroom, and it would be difficult to find anyone who will today insist that they will purchase no CDs containing the voice of Janis Joplin - or Elvis Presley, because they "abused drugs."

I don't think that technology is going to change that. I don't think that, regardless of what happens to Amy, that anyone is going to be condemning her fifty years hence, nor do I think that the grandchildren of those who today forbid their children to play or listen to hip-hop (and with every bit as much success as that enjoyed by their own grandparents who forbade the works of Lennon and McCartney) are going to fail to hotly declare that hip hop is different, and that whatever the kids are listening to in 2058 is just not music at all!

It is at once a very funny phenomenon and a very sad one, useful largely for the occasionally semi-coherent rants of old ladies who take Pills.
 
#27
ShimmaPuff said:
Another aspect I was musing on, as reflected in a snarky comment I made in the Ringo thing, is history, and how all these scandals today are different only in terms of technology and media.

I'm not aware of any tapes of Janis Joplin doing heroin, and if there were such a thing, I am sure it would have been all over the place by now, but her addiction was no secret back then, no less scandalous to some, no less tragic to others, just as had been the case with our parents in Judy Garland's day, and their parents before them with Lady Day.

Plus ca change, plus ce la meme chose.

So just as the awful racket made by those terrible shaggy-headed Beatles is today acknowledged as some of the finest music ever written, even by youngsters to whom the tunes are as familiar as their ears, but who may not even realize, upon hearing some symphony orchestral rendition of "Hey, Jude," that it is a "Beatles song," so are the tragedies and scandals of yesteryear softened and faded into a romantic etude of suffering genius.

There are no tapes of the scenes that met the eyes of Billie Holiday's band members, back in her dressing room, no one held up a cell phone and recorded what we know must have gone on in Judy Garland's bedroom - and bathroom, and it would be difficult to find anyone who will today insist that they will purchase no CDs containing the voice of Janis Joplin - or Elvis Presley, because they "abused drugs."

I don't think that technology is going to change that. I don't think that, regardless of what happens to Amy, that anyone is going to be condemning her fifty years hence, nor do I think that the grandchildren of those who today forbid their children to play or listen to hip-hop (and with every bit as much success as that enjoyed by their own grandparents who forbade the works of Lennon and McCartney) are going to fail to hotly declare that hip hop is different, and that whatever the kids are listening to in 2058 is just not music at all!

It is at once a very funny phenomenon and a very sad one, useful largely for the occasionally semi-coherent rants of old ladies who take Pills.
Click to expand...


You are such a great writer..I wish I was half as good as you:lol: I have been in college for 3 years and always had problems with writing, but I am trying to get better...I'll just stick to the medical field:shame:
 
#29
bagnshoofetish said:
^^^every other celebrity? you mean every other addict. And American celebrities are no different than anyone else. An addict is an addict. It is a very serious disease that cannot be trivialized as something that only happens to celebs. The success rate for people who go into rehab is only about 5%. The rest relapse. Its not because you are or are not a celeb. Its the disease. Its not right or fair to demonize someone who relapses due to being a celebrity. Getting sober is easy. Staying sober is not. For anyone.
Click to expand...
this is very true..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Back