Red Green and Blue: From Da Vinci to DiCaprio… Sorting Science and Art
Image from Blood Diamond
Jimmy: I really love Leonardo DiCaprio. In addition to being a great performing artist, he is sincere in his effort to champion the world environmental cause. And not only is he an excellent spokesman, he also walks the walk even to the point of flying commercial rather than by private jets. He ranks with Ed Begley Jr. and others who live by example, and that says something to me.
Other people don't get me as excited. Now I understand that artists, entertainers and world environmental leaders have different security needs and are often bound by this, but where does the line cross between a machiavellian end justifies the means soot-belching locomotive to environmental Shangri La compared to life by example? What is sincerity and what is sophistry? And does all of this help or undermine the cause? That's the topic of our discussion.
Image source: LeonardoDicaprio.com
Tags: Activism, Climate Change, Film, Fine Arts, leonardo+dicaprio, Media, politics, Red, Green and Blue
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:01 pm
I never thought I’d say this, but Jimmy, I completely agree. Did you see the article on Grist about John Mayer’s statement on being “light green”? I wanted to puke, and I didn’t even listen to his music.
I think it’s important to note that this type of environmental hypocrisy is dangerous for two reasons: one, I think it does undermine the cause. Just look at the backlash for Al Gore’s display of wealth.
Two, we live in a country where, unfortunately, a frighteningly large amount of people apparently lack the will or ability to think for themselves. The celebrity worship that pervades a certain section of the population encourages people to aspire to the kind of excess and decadence that is unnecessarily harmful to the environment.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:33 pm
I guess I really don’t have that big of a problem with Al, Kelli. He certainly has travel requirements unlike most people and good for him that he’s got the wealth to have the type of home he does.
He should come with an hypocricy disclaimer though when he starts preaching.
John Travolta was on a bit of thin ice here too. Sometimes I don’t think these people have a clue what the real world is.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Kudos to you Jimmy, for giving praise where it's due, even if the praisee is a godless Hollywood elite liberal!
Of course it's hypocritical when green-talking celebrities and leaders lead less-than-green lives, or when enviros don't give credit to Red-Staters who quietly do the right thing (an informative entry in Snopes there, though I'll bet all those travels on Air Force One aren't offset by carbon credits, however questionable the concept of credits might be … but I digress).
A wise tree-hugger named Jesus once made the same point, chastising the rich man who made a big show of throwing cash into the collection box while honoring the poor widow who quietly and without fanfare donated one of her last few mites to the church. That's why I admire people who do more than show up at flashy green grip-and-grins and instead do things like actually build homes for Habitat for Humanity or, like Edward Norton Jr., help low-income homeowners save on energy by installing solar panels on their houses.
But, as always, there's enough hypocrisy to go around, and by that I mean some right-wingers who mock celebrities' sincere efforts to save the Earth. I'll agree Sheryl Crow's toilet paper comments were, while well intended, silly in the grander scheme of things. But there is no shortage of conservatives who deride any efforts to reduce, reuse, recycle.
Rush Limbaugh and his ongoing crusade against all persons blue or green comes to mind; I also recall an old radio fogey who referred to Leonardo as "Di Crapio" every chance he got. (And, clearly, Jimmy, you don't fall into that category!)
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:56 pm
I think if you want to compare apples to apples you’d have to compare Bush’s Air Force One travel to the Clinton’s regular international junkets; but I, too, digress.
Hey… this is pretty neat… a green celeb. comparison.
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:04 pm
As for the conservatives at least they wear their overt consumption on their sleaves.
What do you think about Bush’s enviro-ranch?
And it’s Bill Frist instead of the other well-known former Senator from Tennessee who has installed energy efficient closed loop geothermal heating and cooling in his Nashville home.
I think you’ll find more conservatives who actually are closet environmentalist than those who heat with raw crude oil and drink blended puppies
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:16 pm
I'm pro-enviro-ranches and geothermal homes, no matter what sentiment might be on their owners' bumper-stickers (on a Prius, of course, right?). And if someone wants to flagellate green-lite celebs for talking one way and living another, that's fine too. You can't talk environmentalism if you don't live environmentalism, bottom line, period.
Is that always easy to do? No, especially if you don't have the Midas-like funds of Julia Roberts or Brad Pitt. I find myself in a constant struggle to decide the most responsible way to shop, cook, eat and live: WalMart or the co-op? (I love the co-op, but it's a longer drive; despise WalMart, but it's close.) Organic cheddar or corporate-brand soy cheese? (Organic's good, but soy is healthier and better for the planet … then again, probably not the latter.) So maybe sometimes someone will find me doing something that isn't entirely green, but it doesn't mean I'm not trying.
And, yes, the same is true for many conservatives who are closet — or even non-closet — enviros. Red staters from the West and Southeast understand how vital it is to preserve their environments to sustain the things they value, like ranching, fishing or, gasp, even hunting. (I don't hunt, but I appreciate that the sincere hunter's connection to the animal he kills and eats is far stronger and more genuine than the Food King shopper's connection is to the packaged steak he/she finds in the meat section. And isn't it interesting that hunters are among those starting to lobby hard for a response to climate change? Seems they're noticing the effects first-hand when they go out into the wild, and they don't like what they see.)
So, bottom line, you have to walk the walk and talk the talk. In that regard, I suppose the in-your-face, overt-consumption conservatives are at least honest. However, I'll add that they're also guilty of, to put it delicately, defecating in their own backyards in a cosmic sense: just because they can't see the environmental damage they're doing and don't have to live next door to the mound of waste they generate doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:30 pm
Ran across this on instapundit last month.
A GOP Prius? Ahhh the b*stard probably just bought it so he could drive in the HOV lanes without having to car-pool.
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:34 pm
I don’t hunt… never really enjoyed it. I do love my guns though “…cold dead hands” and all of that.
Do you shoot, Shirley?
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:37 pm
Hey… just noticed you were picking on overt consumption.
I defend it here in an earlier post. I put that one up right after I defended Bush’s environmental policy.
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:54 pm
I think the perceptions of Bush and conservatives in general by the more liberal community are incorrect. Bush is more or less an ordinary guy (a bit smarter than average) in an extraordinary circumstance. I really think it’s great of him that he has made the personal sacrifices he has to serve his country as President.
http://rationalenvironmentalist.com