I'm no cultural critic, and also, not sixteen, so I don't have much to say about this except the banal bewilderment at how much extra-tragic it seems when rich, beautiful, famous people die young. There were pills found near the body, and it happened in the middle of the day, which makes it sound like suicide. Even worse, he had a masseuse scheduled, which makes it sound like a too-successful suicide attempt. But presumably there will be an autopsy.
Copyright © 2010 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
I'm no cultural critic, and also, not sixteen, so I don't have much to say about this
In fairness, he took some challenging roles in movies decidedly not aimed at swooning teen-aged girls (Monster's Ball, Brokeback Mountain, I'm Not There). And this is a matter of opinion, but I thought he was a very good actor. So the tragedy--to the extent that there is one--isn't that he was rich, beautiful and famous. It's that we may have lost out on fifty years or so of interesting performances in good movies. Obviously there are much greater tragedies, but it's still a sad loss.
On one hand I feel guilty that my sole concerns are cracking jokes and hoping they finished filming Batman
On the other, it's not like a million others who had far fewer chances are going unmourned
These things come in threes. Owen Wilson, Heath Ledger... your move Matt Dillon
You don't have to be 16 to be bereaved when a talented artist and human being - especially one with a young daughter - dies a morbidly pre-mature death, especially if there's a chance he may have taken his own life. Having a parent who made the same choice, your flippant dismissal that nobody outside of hormonally-charged pubescent girls would care is almost revolting.
Having a parent who made the same choice, your flippant dismissal that nobody outside of hormonally-charged pubescent girls would care is almost revolting.
Frances, I had a parent who made the same choice, too. And I had the same reaction to the "I'm not 16" remark.
I apologize, I just meant that I'm not a devoted fan with an encyclopedic command of his oeuvre, not that I don't care that he's dead. It's always sad when another human being dies.
Why do you assume it's suicide? Could've been an accidental overdose.
He'd already finished filming the Batman sequel.
I can't help but think this suicide was connected to the likely harassment Heath suffered everytime he strolled the streets of New York: "Hey, look! It's the gay cowboy!"
Don't worry, Megan, as someone who works with 16 year olds regularly, I got your flippant comment.
And I wonder, where was all the outpouring of support for Brad Renfro?
I like him in a movie where he was an aspiring knight in the Middle Ages. Sad, but as with Brad Renfro and near-miss Owen Wilson, these fellows are completely rudderless.
I agree with JB -- he was a fantastic actor and really deserving of the Oscar for Brokeback Mountain, so I think this is more about mourning an artist rather than just a celebrity.
DG wrote: Don't worry, Megan, as someone who works with 16 year olds regularly, I got your flippant comment.
It so happens that I don't spend much time around 16 year olds, but I am sufficiently familiar with the conversation mechanisms of girls in the 13-16 age group that I also "got" the comment.
Friendly note to Frances and Kathy: If you're not over it sufficiently to avoid being offended by a random comment on the Internet that was not directed at you or your specific circumstance, then you need to be talking it out with trusted people in real life, not projecting it against strangers in a medium that lacks 70% or more of conversational context.
anonymouse,
If I live to be 100, the subject of suicide will always be a touchy one for me. I don't expect everyone to know it or walk on eggshells, certainly not on something as vast as the internet, but under the circumstances of making the announcemnet of a young man's untimely death, I thought Megan's attempt at interjecting humor was out of place.
But I do think it was extrememly classy and gracious of Megan to apologize and clarify what she meant. Thank you, Megan.
One of the most shocking things is that he didn't seem to be a celebrity train wreck. Brad Renfro - sure, Anna Nicole - we were rather shocked she'd lived this long, Kurt Cobain - listen to 2 Nirvana songs and it won't be a shock. Heath had a family, a successful, varied career with both significant artistic films and commercial success. What the public knew of him didn't suggest a man tortured by demons or abusing dangerous substances.
As to the 16-year old girl comment - a handsome young actor who had done more than a few teen and light romance films is going to be the province of young women. Jezebel has more than a few posts by readers mentioning how they wallpapered their rooms with his posters. Megan is only a few years outside of the demo that would have been expected to have him plastered on the wall now or in the past. It's too bad that you are still so wrapped up in your grief that you can't grasp the real world. The suicide of a parent is unbelievably world changing, as is the suicide of anyone close, but if you're venturing onto the internet you should be aware it isn't for the emotionally fragile.
It wasn't pills. He was at the apartment of one of the Olsen twins.
Maybe he inhaled too strongly and she got stuck in his windpipe, and he choked to death.
More seriously, I just watched him in The Brothers Grimm, and quite liked him. I was bummed to hear that he died.
I think it's a bit premature to conclude this was a suicide. tmz.com says Ledger had pneumonia and that the police told his family that the death appears to be an accidental overdose. But apparently he also had a prior drug problem.
Admittedly I don't check in on Megan's blog as much as I used to -- nothing personal, Megan -- but, still, I have to say it's good to see overly sensitive commenters taking her "real-time" thought-posts so darn seriously and posting their own, even less thought-through reactions.
(I assume there are still the usual insane idiots commenting on her economic and political postings.)
. . . I'm starting to remember why I don't check in here as often, and it has nothing to do with the quality of Megan's postings.
Not a suicide. If there were pills "near" the body as you report, that means there were some left over, afterwords. How do the cops decide whether a drug addict's death was an unintentional OD or a suicide? They look to see if there's anything left in the syringe or in the kit. If there is, it's not a suicide, most likely it's an OD. When you want to kill yourself, you take everything; you don't save any for the next day.
I like him in a movie where he was an aspiring knight in the Middle Ages. Sad, but as with Brad Renfro and near-miss Owen Wilson, these fellows are completely rudderless.
Guess this means there will be no A Knight's Tale 2.
Funny, I am both sympathetic to Megan (and understand what she was driving at) and annoyed by anony-mouse. Here's the thing-- giving people the benefit of the doubt for what they say cuts both ways.
Friendly note to Frances and Kathy: If you're not over it sufficiently to avoid being offended by a random comment on the Internet that was not directed at you or your specific circumstance, then you need to be talking it out with trusted people in real life, not projecting it against strangers in a medium that lacks 70% or more of conversational context.
I have nothing further to say about Megan's specific comment, because Megan apologized, and I agree with Frances that it was classy and gracious of her to do so. I'm sure she didn't mean to offend anyone.
I do, however, wish to take issue with the notion you apparently have that unless a particular comment is directed specifically at a particular person and his or her circumstances, it should not offend. I don't have to have experienced suicide or murder or a terrible illness like cancer in my own life to be offended if someone trivializes the experience of someone who has. That being the case, I certainly don't agree that if I had a parent who committed suicide, I should only take offense or feel distress if my parent's suicide is trivialized, and should feel neutral or indifferent if it's anyone else's suicide. It has nothing to do with how long ago my own experience with suicide was, or to what degree I have "recovered." In my case, it was 30 years ago -- or will be, in October of this year. I am as recovered as I'll ever be. But it would be strange indeed if, having had the experience of losing a parent to suicide, I could compartmentalize that experience to such an extent that the subject itself, as an issue in society, would be a matter of no heightened sensitivity to me at all.
To tell a person who has experienced the suicide of a close family member that they are mentally unstable if it matters to them how the issue of suicide is discussed in general, when it's not specifically about *their* personal loss, is -- in my opinion, of course -- bizarre.
Friendly note to Frances and Kathy: If you're not over it sufficiently to avoid being offended by a random comment on the Internet that was not directed at you or your specific circumstance, then you need to be talking it out with trusted people in real life, not projecting it against strangers in a medium that lacks 70% or more of conversational context.
And
I have to say it's good to see overly sensitive commenters taking her "real-time" thought-posts so darn seriously and posting their own, even less thought-through reactions.
And
The suicide of a parent is unbelievably world changing, as is the suicide of anyone close, but if you're venturing onto the internet you should be aware it isn't for the emotionally fragile.
I found the remark a little off-putting, and I'm not dealing with any personal tragedy, so I suppose I'm just an overly-sensitive asshole 100 percent of the time. Be that as it may, I don't see anything wrong--even on the big, bad, internet--with criticizing remarks that are (even inadvertently, as happened here) insensitive or in poor taste.
Given that the person who made that comment quickly clarified what she meant and apologized, I'm not sure why several people have chosen to jump in to offer free internet etiquette lessons. It's especially puzzling since the etiquette lesson seems to be, "If you expect etiquette on the internet then you've got another thing coming."
Since this is a discussion about the suicide or accidental death of a young man, I don't think it's overly sensitive, or a sign of emotional fragility, for anyone to request a certain amount of respect and decorum. Of course, this being the internet, calls for respect and decorum will be ridiculed as signs of weakness or stodginess. But just because so much of the internet is an emotional, moral and intellectual sub-basement doesn't mean everyone has to like it, or that standards have to be lowered across the board.
Ok, so here's the thing - I don't believe it is reasonable for someone to be "insulted" or "offended" by something not directed to them. (Heck, I'm not even sure it is reasonable to be insulted or offended by something directed to someone. For me it's quite simple, if someone makes a comment about me, either they are right or they are wrong. If they are wrong, I'm not insulted or offended. (If I need to correct the record for others who might not have any context for why they are wrong, I'll do so.) If they are right, and they made the comment intentionally to hurt me, what's the point in being offended? If they were a friend and were being malicious, then I just update their status to "non-friend".
(Sidenote: I love (not) how more and more people (especially via the media) DEMAND apologies. What the heck if the value of an apology made in response to a demand? Oh, I also don't love people being offend by proxy - e.g., "I think you owe so-and-so an apology" or "If I were ____, I would be offended" etc. Let people speak for themselves. Such proxies are, at best, derivative, and have the the speaker's own biases and agendas and are usually without much value with respect to what the true response of the other would be.)
Anyhow, none of this means that I don't believe people should debate or take exception to things posted by bloggers. I love debate. I also love civil discourse.
I like people laying out thoughtful responses. It doesn't mean the response has to be unemotional, but it helps. (Heck, my initial response above was emotional, and probably should have been a little more thoughtful. So, for that I apologize.)
All of that said, here's what I don't like about many comments on blogs. Blogs are a work-in-progress. Blogs reflect the personality of the blogger. All people are pretty complicated, and their thoughts on "life, the universe and everything" are often pretty complex. It seems to me that most blog posts do not exist in a vacuum - especially the short "real time" posts. I think a commenter owes it to the blogger and other readers to be pretty familiar with either the topic (in the more thorough self-contained posts) or the blogger (in the shorter, "real time" or spontaneous posts) - or preferably both - before commenting. It makes any debate more productive and, almost always, more enjoyable for everyone.
Anyone who has been a reader of Megan's various blogs knows that she is neither callous or insensitive. She has an enviable combination of heart and mind, compassion and intellect.
I am objectively shocked that any one would construe her post has insulting, offensive or insensitive. The words just don't support it. But I am totally at a loss for understanding how any regular reader of Megan's blog(s) could think her comment was any of those things. It's like you don't even know her - in which case, you probably shouldn't be posting a comment.
It's always sad when another human being dies.
Except Saddam.
I think you mean "unsuccessful suicide attempt".
The phrasing is not good, but the point is the same as George Carlin's that when planes have a "near miss" that actually means they hit.
P.S. Loved the "banal bewilderment" line. My feelings too.
I am objectively shocked that any one would construe her post has insulting, offensive or insensitive.
I found it insulting: I am a fan of Heath Ledger's work, but I am not a 16 year old girl, I am a 46 year old grandmother. He was a talented actor. Dismissing his fans as teenagers is insulting.
However, I figured it was friendly banter showing disinterest (the way I ask "that's some kind of sport, right?" when friends talk about the Trail Blazers game), not a personal insult to me or others like me.
I think most of the misunderstandings of this type that I have observed have been like this: the reader or listener thinking that something is about me-me-me when the author or speaker thought it was about them-them-them.
As for Mr. Ledger's death, it is sad (he has a young daughter and parents, who will mourn); since this morning's autopsy report was inconclusive, and he is reported to have been suffering from pneumonia, it may yet turn out to be something other than overdose (whether accidental or purposeful).
I can only second JB's first comment.
Ledger had taken on quite a variety of roles in recent years that departed significantly from his work as a teenager. Most acting does little to impress me, but his work in Brokeback Mountain did, and I was actually looking forward to seeing what he did in the upcoming Batman installment in which he is to have the role as "The Joker".
What a tragedy.
I do, however, wish to take issue with the notion you apparently have that unless a particular comment is directed specifically at a particular person and his or her circumstances, it should not offend.
I've been on the Internet since the mid-1990s, and posting in chats, discussions, etc. nearly that long. I've been following MM's posts since about 1999 or 2000, and have been pariticipating in her comments section since it was first opened up around 2002 or so. And I can safely say:
1. I do not know Megan McArdle. I know about some very small portion of her, but I have no doubt that she has many facets I have never seen, and which her familiar friends do not find startling or offensive offensive. (Anybody who knows a nurse or two in person -- I know at least five -- and can imagine what a few of their conversations might look like when converted to a text-only format and presented to near-straners, can understand the extreme range this may involve.)
2. Consequent of that, I am somewhat aware that she has many interests, positions, and possibly even regular activities that I might find personally offensive. However, in all that time of following her writing, I can only think of two instances where I specifically criticized something she said as straying beyond decent, because it was all of: Nominally unprovoked; Extreme in nature; and, Completely out of character based on all precedent.
Every statement has the potential to offend somebody, but that doesn't mean every statement itself is offensive. Those who walk into conversations with near-strangers and then lecture the discussion host for treading on personal sensibilities -- with what was, at worst, a droll observation of fact(!) -- are indulging a curious narcissism. And if you claim that it is right and proper to criticize perceptions of bad taste, I concede it. But I claim, in kind, the right to criticize some perceptions as being out of proportion.
And I wasn't kidding in what I said to Frances and Kathy: it was indeed a friendly piece of advice. Just as one with sensitive ears doesn't walk into a dive bar and expect courtesy, one with a sensitive personal history should seek confidants in real life, not wander into the Internet and expect one person with an audience of millions to be able to appeal to everyone's hidden hot buttons.
So he plays Joker in the next Batman.
Presumably, as in all Batman movies, Batman wins, and the Joker dies.
So how will that be shown now that he's dead in real life? Will they not show it at all? Will they not release "The Dark Knight"?
Other movies have been filmed where an actor died in filming, like "The Crow." But has the dead actor'c character ever also been killed in the movie?
I'm assuming that 1) Warner Bros wants to release Batman, it's a big budget movie after all; and 2) Ledger's family probably wants it released, as a final tribute.
Just as one with sensitive ears doesn't walk into a dive bar and expect courtesy, *one with a sensitive personal history should seek confidants in real life,* not wander into the Internet and expect one person with an audience of millions to be able to appeal to everyone's hidden hot buttons.
Wait. Are you suggesting here that there are people out there who *don't* have sensitive personal histories?