(I suppose the appropriate title would have been "Really, Vanessa's Publicist?" but that doesn't have quite the same ring to it....)
Anyway, when reports surfaced yesterday of Vanessa Hudgens (of "High School Musical 1-X" fame) doing something -- coke? Ecstasy? -- at Coachella yesterday, I was mildly surprised. (See The Superficial.) I mean, on the one hand, she did become famous by starring in a made-for-TV movie targeted at tweeners.... But on the other hand, she did become famous by starring in a made-for-TV movie targeted at tweeners. And there have been questionable pictures of her circulated before -- remember those troublesome reports in late 2007 of her sending some au natural pics to Drake Bell?
But seriously -- white chocolate? That is what her publicist is calling it? For those of you who haven't seen the Coachella pictures, Vanessa is seen -- in a series of about 20 shots -- dipping her fingers into a plastic bag and licking some white substance off of them. As your average, run-of-the-mill twenty-something non-drug-user, I don't know what I would have thought it was. I mean, I thought people snorted coke -- so I wouldn't have thought it was that. And I thought Ecstasy was a tablet, so I wouldn't have thought it was that either. I definitely wouldn't have assumed it was white chocolate. I might have thought it was weird, but I don't know that I would have attributed anything nefarious to the shots. (Now, had it been LiLo, or Paris Hilton, well -- then I probably would have thought it was something "bad", but mostly only because one of them was doing it and so it must be bad.)
But now that Vanessa's publicist is being reported at such pedestrian news outlets as iVillage (mecca of middle-aged-women all over the Midwest) as saying that Vanessa was not doing drugs, just white chocolate! -- well, now I am forced to conclude that she was doing drugs.
Hmmm.
On further reflection, she actually probably WAS doing white chocolate. I bet she just wanted the publicity. The Jessica Biel path to fame, perhaps. (Look how well that turned out for her, Vanessa. Justin Timberlake abandoned that ship.) Although, it does seem that Vanessa was successful. She's been in the news the past two days more than she has been since Zac Efron said his farewells. So maybe "Really, Vanessa?" was the right title for the post. Maybe the publicist was doing exactly what she should -- getting her client back in the news. But what a stupid, stupid way to get back in the news. Couldn't she go swim with some dolphins, a la Hayden Panetierre, or something? Or make a (bad) movie?
In conclusion: Vanessa Hudgens is still not famous for anything good, her publicist could be very smart or very dumb, and I want some white chocolate.
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who doesn't clutch her pearls when there are stories of starlets doing drugs. Perhaps it is because if I were 20 and rich, I'd probably be doing it too. Provided they are responsible and reasonably discrete about it, I don't see a huge problem. This assumes, of course, that the majority of recreational drug users, famous or not, are just that--recreational. (I am NOT condoning Charlie Sheen-level addiction and meltdown.) I'm also not advocating for a loosening of the nation's drug laws. I just think that for a large chunk of the country, some experimentation with drugs is relatively normal. Our current and previous two presidents experimented with drugs. And we are supposed to surprised and appalled when Miley Cyrus take bong hits? Because she's a role model?
ReplyDeleteBottom line for me--Vanessa has the time, the resources, and apparently the hook up to eat a little white chocolate. I only hope that she has the good sense to grow out of it when the time comes.
I don't care so much that she was doing drugs; I'm more annoyed by the fact that either a) she was stupid for trying to deny it with such a ridiculous excuse, or b) the joke is really on us because, by using such a ridiculous excuse, she has managed to become more famous (and essentially, famous for nothing).
ReplyDeleteGood point.
ReplyDeleteI'm conflicted about how I feel about being famous for nothing. If someone wants fame so desparately that they are willing to trade away their privacy and dignity to have it, so be it. Thanks for entertaining me. However, when fame is divorced from talent, isn't that the definition of "infamous"?
In semi-related news, I had a money-making scheme where I would sell "special" brownies out of the trunk of my car at Phish concerts. The special ingredient in the brownies? Chocolate chips. Shit is delicious. Its not my fault if some hippie thinks there's other substances in there.
ReplyDeleteI just spit iced soy latte at my computer. Thanks, Idg.
ReplyDelete