Alizee interview (Mexico)

[TheBarrett]

Jérémy does have that french pretty-boy thing, I mean considering I haven't seen much other men with perhaps the same personality as his in the French music industry. Not exactly Mr. Suave, but better him than say, K-Fed?

[ciarac77]

Originally Posted by Deepwaters

A "crush" is not just physical attraction. I find a lot of women physically attractive that I don't have crushes on. For me, personality is definitely a big part of it; she has to be intelligent, creative, and non-conventional, or it doesn't matter how easy she is on the eyes. I can see a woman and say "hey, she's hot," and then move on and forget all about her, or I can see (and talk to) a woman and go WOW!!! -- heart lost, stupid behavior to follow.

At 18 did you feel the same way? I'd bet crushes for younger people are influenced more by physical attraction than personality...at least right off.

[Deepwaters]

Originally Posted by ciarac77

At 18 did you feel the same way? I'd bet crushes for younger people are influenced more by physical attraction than personality...at least right off.

Yes, at 18 I felt the same way. Physical attraction has always been a necessary but not sufficient ingredient. I have never experienced a crush on any girl or woman who had nothing going for her but a pretty face and a hot body.

As for Alizée, look at the celebrity guys she had schoolgirl crushes on: Brad Pitt, Gerard Depardieu. These are not mindless hunks, they are smart, talented, interesting men. And that's when she was 16.

[Ben]

Originally Posted by Deepwaters

A "crush" is not just physical attraction.

It can be. We'd really have to go back to the original French here, as their words for these things can be much more specific. But then it sounds like almost anything other than a flat out "it was physical" would support your conclusion.

Again though, I'm just playing devil's advocate. While I don't think this rather frivolous interview is the best evidence for it, in broad terms I think you're right.

[ciarac77]

Originally Posted by Deepwaters

Yes, at 18 I felt the same way. Physical attraction has always been a necessary but not sufficient ingredient. I have never experienced a crush on any girl or woman who had nothing going for her but a pretty face and a hot body.

As for Alizée, look at the celebrity guys she had schoolgirl crushes on: Brad Pitt, Gerard Depardieu. These are not mindless hunks, they are smart, talented, interesting men. And that's when she was 16.

I guess I was a shallow teenager, then, b/c at 16 my crush on Brad Pitt was purely physical

[Deepwaters]

Originally Posted by ciarac77

I guess I was a shallow teenager, then, b/c at 16 my crush on Brad Pitt was purely physical

Permit me to question your self-criticism here.

It's just as I've said before about Alizée: sure, she's hot, but there are better-looking women out there, and so what we see in her can't be reduced to that. Sure, Brad's a hunk, but there are better-looking men out there. Men with better bodies, younger and prettier men (I'm assuming you were 16 not THAT long ago). If it was just physical, and just because of his looks, why not some boy-band member, male model, or body builder? Why one of the best, most talented actors in the movies today, who exhibits a complicated personality, a highly refined intelligence, and a depth of emotion? (Has to have that to stand being in a relationship with Angelina Jolie. )

These things can't be isolated. Having a crush on someone always includes physical attraction, but it's never just that. And it crosswires and connects, the mental with the physical, so that an attraction to a person can become an overwhelming desire to have sex with him or her, given a minimum of physical attractiveness. And it says a lot about just who a teenager fixates on, and your choice of heartthrobs when you were 16, like Alizée's, speaks well of you and says to me that you are not shallow at all.

[Neiteio]

At the risk of starting arguments in two threads...

Deepwaters, I like you a lot, but you have to be careful with these assumptions you're making based on what she does and doesn't say. People aren't so easy to read.

It's like if Alizée were a Biology major and I said, "Hmm, she must believe in evolution. Cool," and then I get to know her and find out she's an evangelical Christian who doesn't believe in cavemen. (This actually happened to me). Or if somebody talks about gun violence with a sad look on his face and you think "Hmm, he must not like guns." But then later you discover that that person is a card-carrying member of the NRA and thinks toddlers should carry semi-automatics.

Point being, we can't make these kind of assumptions based on what she does and doesn't say in an interview where she's aiming to please -- or at the very least, not stir the pot. It's a HUGE stretch to take every answer (or more often, non-answer) and use it as the blueprint for her psyche.

I'm not sure if it was noted here or elsewhere, but she really seems like a politician in this interview. The answers are safe and audience-approved, and noncommital where clear answers may disappoint people (i.e. her stance on the rivalry). And she's not even talking about the tough stuff politicians are faced with. All this tells us is that she's good at public relations.

So in conclusion, I'm not saying she's a phony, but I stick by what I've said all along: we'll never know what she's really like. But we're all free to ponder.

[Ben]

Originally Posted by Neiteio

we'll never know what she's really like

Yeah we can't know for sure, but then again we're supposed to take something away from her image. Otherwise there would be no point in it, or in interviews like this. As I said in the other thread, yes she's being commercial, but within those confines also trying to express some truth. So I agree with Deep that personality is probably more important to her than looks (though it's important to add the italicized). It's just that this is NOT the interview to support that. She picks some guys based on pictures, gives a clichéd response about her husband, and mentions a crush, which carries a strong physical connotation even if that's not what it totally meant.

[Deepwaters]

Originally Posted by Neiteio

Deepwaters, I like you a lot

Ah, but if you're not able to read between the lines and understand the personality of someone you've never met, how can you know if you like me or not?

Point being, we can't make these kind of assumptions based on what she does and doesn't say in an interview where she's aiming to please -- or at the very least, not stir the pot. It's a HUGE stretch to take every answer (or more often, non-answer) and use it as the blueprint for her psyche.

No, in these specific cases it is not. There are things we are unable to tell from these interviews together with the performances, e.g. and relating to what you said about the biology major or the person saddened by gun violence, I don't pretend to know anything about her politics. I don't know whether she voted for or against Sarkozy in the last French election (or voted at all). I don't know where she stands on issues such as global warming, the EU, or the war in Iraq. I can't even make a guess, because she's provided no information that could inform such a guess. The only way I could find out is to have a political discussion with her, which I've never done. But given her history, her behavior, and what she's communicated, I CAN say some things about what kind of person she gets involved with romantically, what her attitude is towards publicity and fame, what she wants to do musically, what kind of sense of humor she has, what kind of image she wants to project through clothing. I can observe the interesting mix of flash and privacy, the tendency, as she said herself, to try to balance the two worlds, and I can observe her anger and frustration when one of those worlds impinges on what should be the territory of the other, as in the finger-flashing in the restaurant.

These things are clear. Some things, granted, we can't know. But to say that we can't know anything is simply false. Now, there's a core of truth to it. There are those who DO "fill in the blanks" (as you put it), and attribute to her all sorts of value systems and attitudes which are really theirs, not hers. (People do the same thing with other celebrities, too.) But in avoiding this mistake, we should not make the opposite mistake of thinking we can't know anything. We can.

So in conclusion, I'm not saying she's a phony, but I stick by what I've said all along: we'll never know what she's really like.

These two statements cannot both be true. Either we CAN know (in some ways) what she's really like, or she IS a phony.

[Amigo!]

Originally Posted by Neiteio

we'll never know what she's really like. But we're all free to ponder.

Hey, maybe one day you're walking down the streets of paris and then all of a sudden, Oh my gawd! Lili!

Next thing you know you're having lunch, talking about your day, sharing stories. Then you realize wow, I just made a new friend

Now that would be an awesome day