You don’t know Brit or Winehouse

Watching Amy Winehouse’s performance via satellite during Sunday’s Grammy Awards could lead… Watching Amy Winehouse’s performance via satellite during Sunday’s Grammy Awards could lead the average viewer to one of several conclusions. Either A: She was drunk, B: She was nervous, or C: She was both drunk and nervous. Now, while all three possibilities are completely likely, I’m inclined to pick option B.

But really, no one knows, because, hell, other than the fantastic break out record she made last year and the photos we see of her smoking crack or walking around London in a bra, none of us know anything about her.

Sure, we may read some interviews in which she’s scantly quoted or check out her bio on Wikipedia, but the majority of what the average person knows about Amy Winehouse is gathered from vindictive, slanted tabloids and Internet gossip. Is she pretty messed up? Oh, for sure. But do we ever give her the benefit of the doubt? Nope. Never.

Similarly, the most recent issue of Rolling Stone Magazine features a cover story on Britney Spears. The story, titled “The Tragedy of Britney Spears,” chronicles the quick rise and painful-to-watch fall of a girl who, only a few years ago, was maybe the biggest pop princess the world has ever seen.

Notably, the story didn’t even have an interview with Spears. Instead, it was written – at great length, too – simply based on the quotes and feelings expressed by those closest to her.

Though, to be fair, Spears clearly did not wish to be interviewed, the fact remains that the story was written without hitting upon the most important of subjects – Britney herself.

So here we’ve got two ladies, both public figures, both with some degree of talent (though I’d argue that Winehouse has quite a bit more vocal prowess than Spears) who, during the course of the last year, have spiraled down into a damaging and altogether depressing world of drugs, dysfunctional behavior and lots and lots of public crying. And, the truth is, we don’t know a damned thing about either of ’em. And it’s likely we never will.

You see, both Spears and Winehouse are among the top tier of celebrities who are followed day and night by blood-sucking, soulless paparazzi. Almost everything we’ve heard about either woman in the past year or two has stemmed from tabloid news or unfairly snapped photographs. In that way, the mass media that haunts them has written their biographies.

Their lives, as we understand them, have been dictated, in great detail, not by interviews or memoirs, not by their own words, but rather by the sentiments of those whose sole occupations are to capture their faults and exploit them.

Now, before I continue, don’t get me wrong – both Britney Spears and Amy Winehouse have a lot of problems. Let me repeat: a lot of problems.

Both have been in rehab (Winehouse actually was let out with permission in order to perform for the Grammys) and have made some choices in their careers and lives that, indisputably, weren’t for the best (while a lot of Internet-surfing dudes would disagree, I’d say that Britney probably should’ve been wearing underwear when she got out of a paparazzi-swamped car wearing a skirt in 2006).

Still, I’d be willing to say that the public’s judgment of the two based on the image that the media has branded them with has completely screwed them up.

In this way, we have not acknowledged young musicians struggling with fame. We have damned them for it. For every weird thing Spears or Winehouse does, our obsession with it the next day alienates them further.

Just look at Winehouse’s Grammy performance. She was petrified, completely petrified to be performing in front of such a gigantic (though it was via-satellite) crowd.

She was a scared, camera-shy singer, not a cracked-out weirdo. Every moment she was on the verge of really busting loose and going for it during the performance, she seemed to quickly remember what was going on – that any wrong move would make front page headlines the next day – and became far more reserved. I mean, she almost danced onstage before catching herself, making for a solid, if stifled, performance.

And when she did win the Best New Artist Grammy, Winehouse was completely blown away, near tears and not at all composed.

It was the most touching and honest moment of the whole night – and Kanye West had ‘MAMA’ shaved in the back of his head for his recently deceased mother. Still, she seemed the farthest thing from a Kanye, who, because he’s never really been the target of media chastising, has developed one hell of a stage calm.

The Spears cover article in Rolling Stone, by Vanessa Grigoriadis, says “Britney isn’t ashamed of herself. She wants us to know what we did to her,” and, in a way, I don’t blame her. As is the case with Winehouse, Britney’s been forced to have her every move calculated, criticized and damned instead of being able to deal with problems on her own, even if it is with public awareness. Is it any surprise that she’s so crazy?

So maybe it’s the media that effectively ruined the lives of these two. Or maybe it’s our undying obsession with celebrities that seems to stem from dissatisfaction with our own lives.

Or maybe I’m totally wrong and Britney Spears and Amy Winehouse really just are insane, drug-addicted head cases of their own accord.

And though I don’t think I’m wrong, who’s to say? After all, I only know them through what I read.