| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| damalc |
Posted - 12/13/2007 : 21:49:28
i subscribe to Esquire Magazine and i'm the same way about it that many people are about Oprah.
i've discovered some brilliant entertainment and learned a ton about clothes, though i can't afford the ones that are advertised there.
they run a feature called "What I've Learned." it's like an interview but the questions aren't printed. the most recent issue of Esquire is a collection of entries from "What I've Learned."
at first, i thought, 'what a fucking waste of my subscription.' then i read this one.
maybe this guy really was a superhero.
originally published Dec. 2003
What I've Learned: Christopher Reeve
Superhero, 51, Bedford, New York
We all have many more abilities and internal resources than we know. My advice is that you don't need to break your neck to find out about them.
Many people at fifty think they've already started to go downhill. I actually think the opposite. I nearly died at forty-two; a neurosurgeon literally had to reconnect my skull to my spinal column. So I survived the accident, survived the surgery, survived ulcers, pneumonia, blood clots, broken bones, and a severe allergic reaction to a drug that almost killed me in July 1995. I've been to the edge much sooner than I ever expected. The fact that I'm still here, gaining rather than losing ground, is very rewarding.
Abe Lincoln put it very simply in 1860: "When I do good, I feel good. When I do bad, I feel bad. That's my religion."
Perhaps not saying what you mean is part of the grease that keeps the wheels of society turning. But I've come to believe that it's a waste of time. I've got nothing to lose, so I say exactly what I mean.
We have a government that, generally speaking, does not respond to the people. Seventy percent of the American public supports embryonic-stem-cell research. And yet it's already been banned by the House and is stalled in the Senate. And we have no federal policy. All the excitement generated in 1998, when embryonic cells were first identified, has pretty much died down. Because scientists don't know what's going to happen in the future. Probably the saddest thing is that most young doctors who would like to go into stem-cell research say, "I can't go into that because this may not be going anywhere for a while, and I've got to pay off my student loans."
Never accept ultimatums, conventional wisdom, or absolutes.
Superman is a big fish in a small pond. He's Superman on Earth only because he's in a different solar system. If he'd grown up on Krypton, if Krypton had not been destroyed, he might have been average -- nothing special about him. That allowed me to underplay the character and make him quite casual.
I've never had a dream in which I'm disabled.
Three mornings a week, I work out on a stationary bicycle. I'm riding about eight miles at 48 rpm's. The prep and the doing of it take about four hours.
Some people are walking around with full use of their bodies and they're more paralyzed than I am.
In the first few years after the accident, people were almost too respectful. I remember going on Letterman. He was so serious, almost reverential, that I had to crack jokes to keep the interview alive. But over the years, that's virtually disappeared because people see that I'm living a full and active life. Now it's almost the other way around. What happened to the pity?
Out at Ohio State, a group of engineering students came up with a car that runs on electricity and goes 241 miles an hour. We could do it if we wanted to. But right now the country is controlled by people who don't want to.
Robin Williams is a gift to the world.
I don't obsess about money anymore. By not trying to hold on to it, by not trying to hoard it, by being generous with it, it somehow comes back.
In rehab, I saw both extremes: Good relationships grew stronger, and ones that were in trouble fell apart.
I used to say to my wife, Dana, all the time, "I really put the marriage vows to the test. This is not what we meant by 'in sickness and in health.' "
You get used to the need to be taken care of in the bathroom.
I'm often accused of being too aggressive with researchers, saying, "Why can't you go faster? Why can't you get to the human trials sooner? Please appreciate the fact that the patient population is willing to accept reasonable risks."
Living in fear is not living at all.
I had the privilege of playing Katharine Hepburn's grandson in a play. Perhaps because she'd never had children of her own, I felt that I'd been adopted for the time that we worked together, which was about eight months in '75 and '76. She was very loving, but also very demanding. She set a high standard not only for herself but for the people she cared about. So I was drawn in more deeply than I thought I would be. At the time, I sometimes felt overwhelmed by the challenge of living up to her expectations. Her mantra was "Be fascinating!" I remember thinking, That's sort of like Babe Ruth saying to Little Leaguers, "Just hit the ball."
Success is finding satisfaction in giving a little more than you take.
It's been relatively easy to get the support of politicians who have an emotional connection to disease and disability. For example, Senator Harkin has a nephew with a spinal-cord injury. Now you see Nancy Reagan working behind the scenes, lobbying for stem-cell research beyond the limitations imposed by Bush in August 2001, and you think back to the early '80s, when she and her husband were in office and opposed federal funding for AIDS research. Thousands of people died. It's helpful that she's asking senators to back therapeutic cloning to create more stem-cell lines. But the way I see it, she's doing it now only because Ronnie doesn't recognize her. Why do people wait until it hurts?
I've learned to ignore my moods.
To really become free inside takes either courage or disaster. Certainly to my kids I recommend courage.
If you came back here in ten years, I expect that I'd walk to the door to greet you. |
| 11 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| duh |
Posted - 12/20/2007 : 17:26:09
Christopher Reeve's first "big break" was a role on a soap opera. I used to watch soaps when I was young and I remember his character, "Ben Harper." Harper was a really gorgeous rich guy who was a bit of a rake. After Reeve left the role, Harper was far less interesting even though Reeve's replacements were also handsome. So, I'd have to say he had skills that enhanced the character.
|
| Downtown |
Posted - 12/20/2007 : 15:57:12
His performance in "Anna Karenina" was about as enjoyable as flossing my teeth with barbed wire. And what was that TV movie where he pretended to be paralyzed so he could sue somebody? I remember I saw that a few years after his accident and it was really eerie. |
| randall |
Posted - 12/20/2007 : 14:12:07
quote:
Originally posted by MisterBadIdea
Although let's not heap on the praise here: His work in Superman IV: The Quest for Peace is a good indication that he wasn't much of a writer. Another good indication: this article, which I'm not very impressed with. He's got some interesting observations here and there, but for the most part I'm seeing a lot of platitudes. I don't know if this thing was written or just an off-the-cuff interview, but a lot of the things in it are of no use to me at all. Stuff like "Never accept ultimatums, conventional wisdom, or absolutes," "Some people are walking around with full use of their bodies and they're more paralyzed than I am," or "Robin Williams is a gift to the world" (No, he is not.) don't particularly make me think of him as a great mind.
I'm sure that opinion is colored by the fact that they were buds back at Julliard. |
| MisterBadIdea |
Posted - 12/19/2007 : 09:04:38
Yeah, I'll go with what ChocolateLady on the whole public debate thing. Reeve, and I'm sure many others, really wanted to be cured, to have the ability to move again, whereas others are more accepting of their disabilities and just want to live their lives comfortably. Neither side is more right or more wrong, I'd say. Reeve attracted controversy because he was the most visible and vocal spokesman for the disabled, and thus would always have been a target for those who disagreed with him.
As for Reeve the actor, I've always liked his work, as Superman and elsewhere. His interpretation of the Man of Steel has been rightly praised as superb, and he does have a number of notable other credits in films like Somewhere in Time, Street Smart and The Remains of the Day.
Although let's not heap on the praise here: His work in Superman IV: The Quest for Peace is a good indication that he wasn't much of a writer. Another good indication: this article, which I'm not very impressed with. He's got some interesting observations here and there, but for the most part I'm seeing a lot of platitudes. I don't know if this thing was written or just an off-the-cuff interview, but a lot of the things in it are of no use to me at all. Stuff like "Never accept ultimatums, conventional wisdom, or absolutes," "Some people are walking around with full use of their bodies and they're more paralyzed than I am," or "Robin Williams is a gift to the world" (No, he is not.) don't particularly make me think of him as a great mind. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 12/19/2007 : 08:48:19
I work in the non-profit sector and I can tell you that, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, you can't please all of the people all of the time. So it doesn't really matter if some people didn't like some of the things Reeve did after his accident. It is always best to focus on the positive, and while he wasn't the world's greatest actor, he will always be remembered for his portrayal of Superman. He also wasn't the world's best advocate for the disabled, but he had a high enough profile to raise lots of money for certain very worthy causes. He also had the full right to choose which of those causes he wanted to raise money for. If some people disagreed with his choices, that's just a matter of opinion. Is raising money for services better than raising money for research or visa versa? The correct answer is as illusive as figuring out which came first, the chicken or the egg. |
| Downtown |
Posted - 12/18/2007 : 15:00:29
You can dispute the use of the word "huge," but not "hated." Trust me on this one.
Anyway, I don't want to argue about it because like I said I think he did some pretty cool stuff, and it's the kind of issue that's complicated enough that I really can't say either side is wrong. |
| randall |
Posted - 12/17/2007 : 22:27:01
quote:
Originally posted by 14-0
Just for the record, there are a HUGE number for people living with severe disabilities that hated Christopher Reeve and his political causes, and not on the grounds you might think. That doesn't necessarily mean he was wrong, but it's important to be aware that not everybody accepted his self-appointed role as spokesperson for them, and that's significant because he was influencing where millions (billions?) of dollars were going and how they were being spent. Remember the famous Super Bowl PSA? That actually provoked a lot of anger in some corners. These are very controversial issues and questions, but just remember that every dollar spent on "research" is a dollar NOT spent on services.
Don't interpret this message as taking a stand one way or the other, I'm just filling in a few gaps of information. The media made him into a champion of all disabled people, but the reality is far more complicated than that.
I still think he did a lot of cool stuff. But it's important to look beneath the surface, magazines love running "uplifting" stories without bothering to look at all the facts and really examine the issues.
I understand your point, but would dispute your word HUGE when paired with "hated." [Patriot bombast?] Reeve left the world a better place than he found it, and was admired by MANY disabled people. Not all, but MANY. The proper dispensation of charitable gifts is a whole nother can of worms which has more to do with bureaucracy and mendacity, or, for that matter, with, say, Jerry Lewis, than it does with Mr. Reeve. |
| Downtown |
Posted - 12/17/2007 : 18:22:50
Just for the record, there are a HUGE number for people living with severe disabilities that hated Christopher Reeve and his political causes, and not on the grounds you might think. That doesn't necessarily mean he was wrong, but it's important to be aware that not everybody accepted his self-appointed role as spokesperson for them, and that's significant because he was influencing where millions (billions?) of dollars were going and how they were being spent. Remember the famous Super Bowl PSA? That actually provoked a lot of anger in some corners. These are very controversial issues and questions, but just remember that every dollar spent on "research" is a dollar NOT spent on services.
Don't interpret this message as taking a stand one way or the other, I'm just filling in a few gaps of information. The media made him into a champion of all disabled people, but the reality is far more complicated than that.
I still think he did a lot of cool stuff. But it's important to look beneath the surface, magazines love running "uplifting" stories without bothering to look at all the facts and really examine the issues. |
| MisterBadIdea |
Posted - 12/14/2007 : 08:45:52
...but trust me on the sunscreen. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 12/14/2007 : 08:40:42
quote:
Originally posted by damalc
Some people are walking around with full use of their bodies and they're more paralyzed than I am.
Too true! |
| w22dheartlivie |
Posted - 12/14/2007 : 05:28:25
One of the ironies that struck me in reading that was the part about his wife, Dana.
I used to say to my wife, Dana, all the time, "I really put the marriage vows to the test. This is not what we meant by 'in sickness and in health.'"
She only lived 17 months after he died. 45 is too young, as well. |
|
|
