Spring Break
Winehouse attacks are hypocritical
Bailey Singletary
Issue date: 2/29/08 Section: Opinion
Bailey Singletary is a junior majoring in communication. She can be contacted at opinion@reflector.msstate.edu.
Everyone knows that women have a bad habit of gossiping, especially when speaking of Hollywood award shows. The catty comments range from what people are wearing to who does and doesn't deserve to win. Sometimes people get offended when they aren't chosen for an award (yeah I'm talking about you Faith Hill), or their favored artists don't get chosen. But when Natalie Cole told People magazine that Amy Winehouse should not have won her awards at this year's Grammys because of her drug-abuse reputation, I feel it just made Cole look a bit, well, bitchy.
While at a Grammy after-party, Cole said: "I don't think she should have won. I think it sends a bad message to our young people who are trying to get into this business, the ones who are trying to do it right and really trying to keep themselves together. We have to stop rewarding bad behavior." Well sorry Natalie Cole, but I think that's the pot calling the kettle black because you also had a drug abuse problem at one time and it didn't stop you from receiving awards. In 1975, Cole was arrested in Canada for heroin possession and, oddly enough, she accepted the 1975 Grammys for Best New Artist of the Year and Best R&B Female Vocal Performance before entering rehab in 1983.
I in no way condone the actions of Amy Winehouse and her friendship with the "white lady," but the awards she received were not given to her for her good behavior and ability to be a role model for up and coming singers. They were given to her because she outshined the other nominees in those categories. And let's be honest with ourselves. Drugs and music go hand in hand and this isn't new to any of us.
In fact, if we all followed the beliefs of Natalie Cole, Miles Davis and Ray Charles would never have received their Grammys and if bad behavior is not supposed to be rewarded, her own father, Nat King Cole, wouldn't have been given awards because he behaved badly by having many love affairs while married to her mother.
Everyone knows that women have a bad habit of gossiping, especially when speaking of Hollywood award shows. The catty comments range from what people are wearing to who does and doesn't deserve to win. Sometimes people get offended when they aren't chosen for an award (yeah I'm talking about you Faith Hill), or their favored artists don't get chosen. But when Natalie Cole told People magazine that Amy Winehouse should not have won her awards at this year's Grammys because of her drug-abuse reputation, I feel it just made Cole look a bit, well, bitchy.
While at a Grammy after-party, Cole said: "I don't think she should have won. I think it sends a bad message to our young people who are trying to get into this business, the ones who are trying to do it right and really trying to keep themselves together. We have to stop rewarding bad behavior." Well sorry Natalie Cole, but I think that's the pot calling the kettle black because you also had a drug abuse problem at one time and it didn't stop you from receiving awards. In 1975, Cole was arrested in Canada for heroin possession and, oddly enough, she accepted the 1975 Grammys for Best New Artist of the Year and Best R&B Female Vocal Performance before entering rehab in 1983.
I in no way condone the actions of Amy Winehouse and her friendship with the "white lady," but the awards she received were not given to her for her good behavior and ability to be a role model for up and coming singers. They were given to her because she outshined the other nominees in those categories. And let's be honest with ourselves. Drugs and music go hand in hand and this isn't new to any of us.
In fact, if we all followed the beliefs of Natalie Cole, Miles Davis and Ray Charles would never have received their Grammys and if bad behavior is not supposed to be rewarded, her own father, Nat King Cole, wouldn't have been given awards because he behaved badly by having many love affairs while married to her mother.
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
Leslie
posted 3/01/08 @ 12:51 AM CST
I think anyone who is involved in illegal activities at the time of the awards should be disqualified. Winehouse has a history and needs to get clean. (Continued…)
Blake Cunningham
posted 3/01/08 @ 12:22 PM CST
Leslie,
Like Bailey said, it isn't about good behavior. It is about music. If the Grammys disqualified ALL nominees for illegal activity, then there would be no performers to reward. (Continued…)
Dan
posted 3/02/08 @ 8:27 PM CST
Amy Whinehouse is a cracked out, over hyped hack who couldnt sing her way out of a paper sack. Who cares about the Grammys anyway. She has joined a prestigous class of people, like Jamiriqui and Nillie Vanillie. (Continued…)
KK
posted 3/02/08 @ 10:49 PM CST
Dan-
1. It's Winehouse not WHinehouse.
2. It's Milli Vanilli and Amy Winehouse doesn't lip sing like they did.
3. It's a lei.
4. Good job rhyming in your first sentence like a moron. (Continued…)
Post a Comment