My weekend reading hit upon two fair, non-whiny examples of backlash against paparazzi and their nearly as notorious kin, those who snap celebs on cell phone cameras. Mary-Louise Parker, in an NYT interview about her new play on Broadway, had a good word for the crass act of celebrity snooping: "inelegant." Then she got going:
"I understand the fascination, and I understand the curiosity, but at the same time I understand the fascination and curiosity of staring at someone who has fallen off their bicycle and has a bloody nose," she said. "Does that mean you should stand there and point and look at them as though they can’t see you? I don’t think so. Does that mean you should take a picture of them? Probably not. Does that mean you should take out your cellphone and film them so you can put it on YouTube?"
In the March issue of W, Ryan Phillipe says he's thinking of quitting L.A. because of the street cameras:
“I spend a lot of time just holed up in my house in Los Angeles. I’m thinking of leaving here because of that,” he says. “I don’t really go out because I know it’s going to turn into a photo shoot.” And he is concerned about how his kids are being affected by the paparazzi. “It’s really scarring. It definitely does a number on my eight-year-old daughter. To hear her say that she worries about what she’s wearing when she leaves the house because she knows her picture will be taken…. She’s worried about friends at school who come up to her and say they see her in magazines. It’s a really disturbing environment to bring up a child in."
Photo: Robert Caplin for the New York Times