It seems to me that we as a species reserve greater respect for artistic achievers once they have passed. No great revelation there then, but does this attitude stand up in court, or are we really just being politically correct?
Two pertinent examples from the music field are John Lennon and Kurt Cobain. I am not arguing that John Lennon doesn’t deserve the idolatry bestowed upon him, more that Sir Paul McCartney was every bit as talented and even more prolific than his partner in crime, and therefore deserving of an equal measure of our love. This will doubtless come to pass when Sir Paul leaves us.
There is no doubt that, at the time of Kurt Cobains death in 1994, Nirvana were amongst the biggest bands in the world. Cobain was certainly at the top of his game. The fact that he died whilst on top merely serves to remind us of what he MIGHT have gone on to achieve. The reverence with which he is remembered, in my opinion, overstates the impact he actually had whilst here.
Hollywood also has its ‘dead famous’ club. I give you Marilyn Monroe and James Dean.
Monroe was a strictly limited actress. Her greatness in death is a tip of the hat to her celebrity rather than her big screen stature and in my mind steals some of the affection which should be reserved for the truly stellar performers of her time such as Hepburn, Davis and Crawford.
Jimmy Dean is similar to Cobain in that, whilst he made a great start to his career, he was not prolific enough to be deserving of the veneration he receives. In Deans’ case, the manner of his untimely death helps his star to continue to shine.
I don’t wish to down play the talent these artistes have or the strength of feeling that people have toward them. I just feel that sometimes we should reserve our greatest accolades for those who are lucky enough to live a full life and whole career.
