While I was skimming through CNN.com this afternoon (it's my home page -- how impressed are you with me right now?), I couldn't help but notice this headline standing out from the rest of the "news" like a dashing diamond in the rough: Brad Pitt ponders quitting acting. In spite of myself, I couldn't resist -- to what, I wondered, might the handsomest man alive be devoting himself if not to acting? Producing? Directing? Spending more time with Angelina Jolie and their adopted African children (and that needy little bitch, Shiloh)?
Not exactly. It turns out that Brad -- ever the philanthropist since ditching his wife of five years -- plans to focus on rebuilding New Orleans by putting up "150 eco-friendly homes in the Louisiana city's Lower 9th Ward" with "the ultimate goal [being] to build eco-friendly homes throughout New Orleans and the Gulf Coast." According to CNN's interview -- in which the star of Meet Joe Black also has interesting things to say about the Katrina disaster ("it was a man-made failure"), the lack of a "concept of waste" in nature ("Anything that's discarded becomes fuel or becomes food for something else") and how he "leverages" his celebrity for good causes ("The press uses me, I use it") -- Pitt says that acting is a "younger man's game" and that "there's just other things I'd rather be doing."
Now, I'm torn, because on the one hand I think it's great that Brad Pitt is putting his money and his fame toward a good cause (you can learn more about his organization at www.makeitrightnola.org), but on the other hand, I'm kind of hesitant to give him a big pat on the back because he's doing some community service and installed solar panels on his mansion. What about all the people who don't command $10 million per film who were rebuilding homes in New Orleans while Brad Pitt was busy filming Ocean's 13? Why aren't they mentioned in this article?
I guess my problem isn't really so much with Brad Pitt as it is with the notion that celebrities deserve some special praise for being involved with something other than themselves. Because, frankly, I think that celebrities have an obligation to get involved in good causes. I know that Brad Pitt works hard and all, and that he has to put up with people sticking cameras in his face or whatever, but the guy is clearly kind of blessed to be where he is in life. Really, everyone should try to be involved in their communities, but celebrities like Brad Pitt are in a special position because they have more money than they need -- which they can use to help out and which means they can afford to take time off -- and people listen to them (although, I'm not entirely comfortable with the notion that we should care whom Oprah or Madonna endorses for president, but whatevs). For better or worse, movie stars and musicians are leaders of the world that we live in, and they (should) have a responsibility to use that power to make it a better place.
So cheers, Brad, for doing a genuinely good thing. But you'll forgive me if I don't pin the Medal of Freedom on you just yet.
Sources:
Pitt: Acting becoming 'less a focus' [CNN]
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Brad Pitt is going to build you a house
Posted by Andrew at 10:12 AM
Labels: Brad Pitt, celebrity worship, community service, New Orleans
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree, great editorial! There are dedicated, selfless activists out there who often take a vow of poverty (whether intentionally or not) to pour their souls into helping other people, the environment, and animals. I'd love to see the day when they become celebrated and that becomes news.
Post a Comment