From New York Times Monday, March 3

Attributes to the Job


Shockingly money doesn’t seem to be the issue for the 43-year-old actress Mary-Louise Parker. Winning a 2001 Tony Award and receiving rich raves for her performances in numerous theatrical performances Ms. Parker is a very well distinguished actress with a love for acting. Her recent arrival on the small screen in “Weeds,” “Angels in America,” and ‘West Wing” has brought about complications in her life that can be described as a nightmarish. Ms. Parkers describes the prying impulses of paparazzi repeatedly as “inelegant.” The moral failings of paparazzi produce a voyeuristic fascination with celebrities that questions what the public should have privilege too and what is too far.

Campbell Robertson’s interview with Mary-Louise Parker casts the question: “Does tabloid attention come with the job?” Neither Robertson nor Ms. Parker agree that it should. Ms. Parker displays her hatred for tabloid exploitation in comparing it to a sexual assault crime. Ms. Parker draws an analogy between a woman wearing a short skirt and asking for it to her exploitation as an actress by the paparazzi. The fundamental debate of tabloid slander and paparazzi hounding is never bluntly addressed but lines are given to the subject matter. Ms. Parker portrays paparazzi as having gone too far and making the lives of many celebrities hell when off the set.

Robertson’s interview fails to addresses the question between acceptable celebrity fascination and fascination that crosses the line. In her opening paragraph Robertson quotes Ms. Parker in saying, very matter-of-factly, that she had tried to get out of this interview. At first glance Ms. Parker’s interview dilemma was thought to be from her indecision to solely do theatre or to do both theatre and the small screen. Yet after finishing the story, questions arise to weather Ms. Parker really just wants to keep her life private and the interview itself perturbs her.

The interview of Mary-Louise Parker gives a definite sense of her attitude. Unwilling to allow her small screen performances to be edited or rearranged Mary-Louise Parker comes off as a strong independent actress. Robertson describes talking to her to be “rather intimidating.” Her strong attitude comes across very prevalently when she addresses the directors of “Weeds” in editing her performances saying, “People were made aware.” Robertson goes on to include, “when she made clear, loud and clear, that her performances were not to be edited and rearranged without her knowledge.” Describing the facial features of Ms. Parker during the interview Robertson questions if 125 pound Ms. Parker has the strength to actually rip her head off. Robertson finds the tight-pursed lips of Ms. Parker’s frigid and they come out during their discussion of paparazzi. It is evident from the uptight speech of Ms. Parker that her hatred for the discussion of her offstage life has altered her mood and gives a different portrayal of her in this interview.

The security of family is the only thing Mary-Lousie Parker mentions as a viable reason to give up the job (acting) that she so loves and is so good at. Yet this security is being breached as Ms. Parker mentions, “Living in a fishbowl is a nightmare, but doubly so when family is involved.” Possibly her tabloid moment with Billy Crudup is still resonating in her mind but doubtable so. More to the point falls the question that was tip toed around in the interview, “Does tabloid attention come with the job?” In all practical purposes the answer seems easy, but in transcending to different jobs and their respective stereotypical attributes maybe the answer isn’t so clear. Is being an asshole a prerequisite for being a cop?