A RICH COAT OF GLOSS ON A TRAJECTORY SPIRALING
DOWN
By CARYN JAMES
The New York Times, 9/7/06
Sometimes
the fine print says it all: “Suri’s onesie by Petit
Bateau; socks by Baby Dior.” What 5-month-old has a stylist?
Or photos taken by Annie Leibovitz?
Just when Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes needed to prove that they
were regular human beings and not — as their downwardly spiraling
images have it — flakes, Vanity Fair landed on newsstands
yesterday with 22 pages of photographs and an interview that accomplish
just the opposite. The extravagantly orchestrated photo shoot reveals
a media circus masquerading as ordinary life, and speaks to the
devil’s bargain some celebrities make with the public.
As Leibovitz photos go, these are not among her best. The magazine
cover, with Suri tucked inside her father’s jacket, evokes
a famous 70’s photograph of Paul McCartney with his infant
daughter tucked in his jacket, taken by his wife, Linda. The derivative
picture is shrewdly calculated in a different way, though. Both
parents have their eyes down, gazing at Suri, who stares directly
at the camera; it’s a photograph that says, “Look, it’s
not about us, it’s about her.”
But of course it is entirely about them, with Suri as their beautiful
little prop. In a dozen other pretty but ordinary photographs (with
another fashion credit for Suri’s dress), many in close-up
and one set against the Rocky Mountains, they gaze at her and beam.
But these are hardly private moments.
The story, written by Vanity Fair’s features editor, Jane
Sarkin, describes how she, Ms. Leibovitz and what she calls “a
small crew” (there are credits for hair and makeup people
and a stylist) secretly holed up for five days and nights at the
400-acre Cruise estate in Telluride, Colo. They arrived during a
family visit that included 15 Holmeses and a gaggle of Cruises,
including his mother, sister and the children he and Nicole Kidman
adopted when they were married, Isabella and Connor.
There is one family portrait of Isabella, 13, and Connor, 11, with
the new parents and baby. That’s another shrewd move; any
parent knows you have to include the older children. And there is
a 1996 photo, also taken by the trusted Ms. Leibovitz, of Mr. Cruise
and the older children. The way those children have been shielded
— they haven’t been hidden from the public but haven’t
been paraded, either — is admirable, instructive and entirely
different from the Suri circus. Parents, even celebrities, who want
privacy for their children usually manage to find it.
But if you announce your romance on “Oprah” and your
engagement at an international news conference, you can’t
complain about press coverage later; that is the compact Mr. Cruise
and Ms. Holmes implicitly made with the public. Yet now they’re
actually complaining.
“It eats away at me because it’s just not O.K.,”
Ms. Holmes says in the Vanity Fair interview about the hurtful gossip,
ranging from stories that Mr. Cruise bought his own sonogram machine
during her pregnancy (“We were followed by paparazzi, and
so my doctor had to make house calls,” she explains) to crueler
rumors that Suri, who seemed to be hidden away, didn’t actually
exist. Ms. Sarkin’s complicit article describes “the
prying public eye” and the “scoop-starved public”
greedy for Suri images. But who asked anyone to pry other than Suri’s
own parents, he laughing maniacally and she giggling endlessly before
the cameras?
No one really thought Suri was imaginary or some creature from another
planet. The press was simply expecting what the Cruise-Holmes publicity
machine had conditioned them for: more displays of a family life
that only the Cruise camp can possibly see as normal.
Ordinary parents protect their children, as Isabella and Connor
seem to have been guarded; that’s an impulse the public can
identify with in the celebrity game. Suri’s parents might
have gotten more mileage out of releasing a modest family snapshot
and leaving it at that, shutting down the media frenzy without inventing
a bigger show of their own. A show is clearly what they were looking
for, but the entire over-the-top operation — the famous photographer,
the photo so hyped it was revealed on Katie Couric’s first
newscast as CBS anchor Tuesday — carries a whiff of desperation.
It’s almost as desperate as Mr. Cruise’s recent apology
to Brooke Shields (offered just in time for her to mention it on
the “Tonight” show) for his public attacks on her use
of antidepressants. What he really needs to do is ask his former
publicist, Pat Kingsley, to forgive him for firing her and take
him back. He needs somebody on his side who can convince the public
that he knows the difference between a celebrity photo shoot and
real life, whether he actually knows the difference or not.
|