taumbu
Member
Posts: 910
Location:
|
Post by taumbu on Aug 21, 2011 11:01:52 GMT -5
Regarding Hicklin being "up to his old tricks again." Aaron Hicklin blindsided Adam with the "2009 Open Letter". In 2009, Hicklin has done similar things to other people in the past. He did not give Adam a chance to provide a comment or response, he never told Adam there was an issue, and it is not even clear that he offered Adam the solo cover. Now there are a few good sources from both Out Mag staff and Adam's camp that Aaron Hicklin made promises to Adam to entice him back to Out Mag but that he is retrenching on those promises. The details may be mangled a bit -- but the consistent thing is that Hicklin is not doing what he promised. Thank you for the explanation. And my voice will be right there with you. Leopards do not change their spots. In 2009 Hicklin blindsided Adam and treated him shabbily. I bought into the concept that the last thing Adam needed was to have a bunch of fans post comments or write letters to the editor. But I have learned a lot in the past couple of years -- and one thing I have learned is that a few thousand voices raised together can make a loud roar -- and Adam has more than just a few thousand committed fans. I think he has enough fans to shape public sentiment and to shift attitudes. There is little that would stir me to real action but IF there is a hint from the heinous Mr. Hicklin that Adam is not "the right kind of gay" I will be one of the loudest voices defending Adam's right, my right, anyone's right to be who I/you are. Finally, I wrote what I wrote mostly as a plea to the universe to make sure all is good and nothing bad happens to Adam. |
|
|
|
Post by Jablea on Aug 21, 2011 11:04:13 GMT -5
This is cute gelly. Anyone no how to follow tumblr and see what magazine or newspaper the article was originally cut out from? |
|
|
|
Post by spring2009 on Aug 21, 2011 11:04:33 GMT -5
Regarding Hicklin being "up to his old tricks again." Aaron Hicklin blindsided Adam with the "2009 Open Letter". In 2009, Hicklin has done similar things to other people in the past. He did not give Adam a chance to provide a comment or response, he never told Adam there was an issue, and it is not even clear that he offered Adam the solo cover. Now there are a few good sources from both Out Mag staff and Adam's camp that Aaron Hicklin made promises to Adam to entice him back to Out Mag but that he is retrenching on those promises. The details may be mangled a bit -- but the consistent thing is that Hicklin is not doing what he promised. Leopards do not change their spots. In 2009 Hicklin blindsided Adam and treated him shabbily. I bought into the concept that the last thing Adam needed was to have a bunch of fans post comments or write letters to the editor. But I have learned a lot in the past couple of years -- and one thing I have learned is that a few thousand voices raised together can make a loud roar -- and Adam has more than just a few thousand committed fans. I think he has enough fans to shape public sentiment and to shift attitudes. There is little that would stir me to real action but IF there is a hint from the heinous Mr. Hicklin that Adam is not "the right kind of gay" I will be one of the loudest voices defending Adam's right, my right, anyone's right to be who I/you are. Finally, I wrote what I wrote mostly as a plea to the universe to make sure all is good and nothing bad happens to Adam. If there is even a chance that Hicklin is up to no good....I hope that Adam and his PR team pull away. I want this storm to yield nothin' but rainbows. |
|
pjd
Member
Posts: 358
Location:
|
Post by pjd on Aug 21, 2011 11:08:46 GMT -5
And what you wrote, Susiefierce, is really interesting. So....how does this fit with all the fuss re Piers Morgan's interview of Christine McDonnel? I have been 'siding' in my mind with Piers but when I read your post I am rethinking a little....did Piers 'blindside' McDonnel? She sees it that way, of course, but is this situation analogous to what happened to Adam? A big difference, of course, is that Adam was not present to defend himself.....so that is not the point...but could Piers have caused himself any issues by veering 'off point'? Interesting question - I would say that a political candidate has to be willing to address current political questions and cannot legitamately make those off topic (unless the interview is with Good Housekeeping about how they decorated their house or with People about their upcoming wedding or something along those lines.) If you are going to appear on a political news-based show you have to expect to be asked questions about current topics. |
|
|
|
Post by SusieFierce on Aug 21, 2011 11:10:53 GMT -5
A fascinating article on charisma (told from an operatic perspective), but the author really examines what it is and (IMO) why Adam has such a brilliant future. www.nytimes.com/2011/08/21/arts/music/what-is-charisma.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1No, unless one of Adam's primary new management team happens to be an attorney. (Many agents are and agents do segue into management.) It's always a risk you take that your client will not be portrayed as you want or expect (happens to politicians all the time), but it is a HUGE risk on the part of the publication to say one thing during negotiations, then turn around and do something completely different. They are gambling with their entire reputation and word travels fast. Other celebs will become wary. I definitely think they approached Adam. And like I said, I hope they groveled. The ONLY way I can imagine Adam's new management approached OUT is that they are crafting a MAJOR media saturation campaign and want him on every outlet possible for the Adam2 launch. They MAY have said to Adam, "We can take the high road, do this and keep our eyes on the bigger prize." (However, I cannot imagine the issue will not be addressed in some way in the interview/article.) I have an interesting question for a Sunday morning. I remember the OUTgate and I was furious at Hicklin as were most of us at the time. I agree with both your posts Q3 and Noangel. And what you wrote, Susiefierce, is really interesting. So....how does this fit with all the fuss re Piers Morgan's interview of Christine McDonnel? I have been 'siding' in my mind with Piers but when I read your post I am rethinking a little....did Piers 'blindside' McDonnel? She sees it that way, of course, but is this situation analogous to what happened to Adam? A big difference, of course, is that Adam was not present to defend himself.....so that is not the point...but could Piers have caused himself any issues by veering 'off point'? I was thinking about this before, but it's a TV interview of a politician a completely different thing. Her behavior was embarrassing and stunningly immature. Any politician needs to be prepared to answer questions on the current issues. ESPECIALLY on TV. And his line of questioning was consistent with the points of her book, which she was there to promote!! If you are promoting something you wrote, you better be prepared to talk about it and stomping off like an impudent child is unbelievable. This is typical of people who are in over their head (ala Sarah Palin and the "gotcha" interviews) and they try to blame the interviewer, who is a journalist who obviously did their homework. It's the job of a political journalist to do a hard-hitting, informed interview and I would imagine in those cases, they make no promises. All issues are on the table. |
|
taumbu
Member
Posts: 910
Location:
|
Post by taumbu on Aug 21, 2011 11:13:04 GMT -5
What I tried to say Q3, is thanking you for your explanation, and my voice will be right there with you. I, too put it out to the universe every day for Adam's continued success, and trust that he will handle whatever is sent his way with wisdom, class and great wit. Cause that's our bb.
|
|
|
|
Post by 4Ms on Aug 21, 2011 11:13:46 GMT -5
4M I am in total agreement. OUT Mag seems to be a bit old fashioned to me. Their entire motus operandi of "outing" people is really no longer needed -- if it ever was. I have always wonder what kind of person contacts celebrities and says -- go public or we will print you are gay anyway? I just think being public about your private life should be the celebs decision. If Anderson Cooper wants to be private about his life, leave him alone.  Do they really do that? If that's the case, it really is the equivalent of Perez and even Perez is a leopard who has changed his spots in that respect. Posted by Michael Jensen , Editor on April 3, 2007 www.afterelton.com/blog/michaeljensen/has-out-magazine-ended-the-debate-over-outingPosted on Advocate.com April 14, 2011 02:00:00 PM ET Outing the "Quiet Gay"By Advocate.com Editors www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/04/14/Gaycom_on_Outing_the_Quiet_Gay/ |
|
|
|
Post by mszue on Aug 21, 2011 11:13:49 GMT -5
A fascinating article on charisma (told from an operatic perspective), but the author really examines what it is and (IMO) why Adam has such a brilliant future. www.nytimes.com/2011/08/21/arts/music/what-is-charisma.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1No, unless one of Adam's primary new management team happens to be an attorney. (Many agents are and agents do segue into management.) It's always a risk you take that your client will not be portrayed as you want or expect (happens to politicians all the time), but it is a HUGE risk on the part of the publication to say one thing during negotiations, then turn around and do something completely different. They are gambling with their entire reputation and word travels fast. Other celebs will become wary. I definitely think they approached Adam. And like I said, I hope they groveled. The ONLY way I can imagine Adam's new management approached OUT is that they are crafting a MAJOR media saturation campaign and want him on every outlet possible for the Adam2 launch. They MAY have said to Adam, "We can take the high road, do this and keep our eyes on the bigger prize." (However, I cannot imagine the issue will not be addressed in some way in the interview/article.) I just read the times article on charisma....thanks for bringing that Susiefierce...it is a wonderful article and you are right...Adam has it in spades and it is a palpable, easily recognizeable, integral feature of his performances and who he is! |
|
babs12
Member
Posts: 260
Location:
|
Post by babs12 on Aug 21, 2011 11:18:34 GMT -5
This is a wonderful article! I read Adam in every point the author makes. Two quotes stood out to me: "Let’s assume for a moment that charisma is the real stuff, less a means than an end in itself. What we generally consider the “content” of the arts — the notes, the libretto, the bowings, the plot — is actually just the structure that makes possible the crucial thing: watching a performer who is able to connect with fundamental realities. It is not that a singer’s charisma makes a colorful aria sound even better but that the aria provides a platform, a vessel, for us to experience the charisma." This is part of the reason we say that Adam transcends the material he performs. It is not just the technique, not just the natural voice he has, but also the charisma that we experience when we see/hear him perform. "The question is whether people want to be swept up. Charisma can be exhilarating but also frightening. Our surrender to it demands a trust that is not easily conceded. If our desire from performance is only for comfort and reassurance, charisma will repel us. It is about revealing scope, and it raises the stakes dangerously high" The second quote is probably the best explanation of why Adam did not win American Idol, and why Kris did. I, too, thought of Adam in this article, and thanks Susie Fierce for sharing and Cassie for your comments. Agree completely with you both, the article and how Adam is reflected in it. |
|
amw
Member
Posts: 756
Location:
|
Post by amw on Aug 21, 2011 11:18:47 GMT -5
Q3, NoAngel - good stuff ladies. I kind of think that Hicklin is a bit of a control freak, horrified by what he sees as the non-mainstream GLBT community and unsure of what to do with someone who doesn't follow the unwritten rules of how to be properly gay.
So who fits into that non-manstream group? Gay men who confess that woman are beautiful and have soft lips that are kissable. Lesbian women who occasionally find men cute enough to kiss or cuddle with. Anyone GLBT who plays around with leather and whips and flirts with or is involved with S&M play.
Adam fits into a couple of those groups. As well, he openly professes his affection for marijauna, in a magazine (RS) and live onstage. So he is comfortable doing illegal things as well. All of this is a bit threatening to a group striving for acceptance in a non-accepting society.
However, it is because of those things that Adam is a fabulous unofficial spokesperson for the edgy, weird fuckin' fags (and lesbians too - cuz I fit into a couple of those groups as well....). We need someone to be open, unashamed of their freak flag and willing to fly the rainbow flag accessorized with some studded leather and a marijauna leaf high.
So let's hope Hicklin can broaden in tiny little narrowly focused mind this time. Adam does not fit into any of his neat categories and he doesn't wear khaki pants. And it's unlikely he ever will. And he is still wildly successful with a broad appeal to gay and straight, young and old national and international. This alone should give Hicklin and all those who are like him in the old guard movement for gay rights something to think about as they move into the next level in the fight for equality.
|
|
