Kathleen Huberis a new writer. Well, new to us. It’s not like she was just born. Just read it.
For those of you who may have been in hibernation, it may come as a shock to you to find out that Amy Winehouse died recently. And for those that have been in Siberia for the last 5 years, you may be shocked to learn that the cause of death may be drug and alcohol related. Because of this, there are some serious questions being asked in the entertainment industry right now. Questions like: Who should have been responsible for making sure that Ms. Winehouse stuck with a treatment program? Who should have made sure Ms. Winehouse didn’t have unlimited and easy access to drugs and alcohol, knowing she had a problem with addiction? Who should have known better than to allow her to book herself for a tour when she clearly wasn’t capable of handling it?
These are all very good questions that need to be answered. But what I want to know is why anyone isn’t asking one question in particular: Who should have been responsible for making that poor girl brush her hair?
When Amy Wineshouse first gained in popularity, she was a healthy looking beautiful young lady with a gorgeously sleek, stunningly smooth, gravity defyingly erected mass of luscious, flossy black locks piled artfully atop her head in an impressive sixties style beehive. That hair was the stuff of legends. A few short years later, and we see Ms. Winehouse with a mass of dry, brittle, gnarled clump of what should have been hair, precariously perched on her head, looking all the world like something styled by a pair of rabid wombats.
I know when I am not feeling my best, putting in the extra time it takes to ensure that my hair is clean, smooth, and well groomed can make the difference between feeling like stumbling around in an addled haze and feeling runway ready. So why wasn’t there one person on her “team” willing to step forward and say “Amy, we love you, and we can’t let you do this to your hair anymore?” Were all of the music moguls so terrified of losing their meal ticket that they didn’t have the decency to make her take a few hours out of her life and take her to a salon?
And the Hollywood stylists, where were they? They eagerly sit back in their perfectly coiffed and combed smugness, dishing out critiques and chastisement for those deemed a train wreck, but did one of them step out of their mighty tower and offer to do a deep conditioning treatment for Winehouse? Did any of them try to get the fashion industry to band together and rally behind this talented young lady who was letting the best hair years of her life go to waste? No, not a single one of them did. And that is a shame. It is their life’s duty to highlight and call forth all things beautiful on this planet, yet they let a rare resource go to tragic waste.
That folks is the true tragedy. Not just that a gifted musician and artist has been taken from us, but that a magnificent head of hair, not seen since Marie Antoinette, and possibly not to be seen again in our lifetimes has been shorn too soon. This world will truly feel empty for it.
Kathleen Hubert is a blogger who writes on a variety of different sites. Check out more of her work at led tv.
Frankly, I find it disturbing and upsetting that you’re so callous in your disregard for the general bird population in the U.K. In an industrialized and tiny country, bird habitats are disappearing at an increasingly alarming rate, and now, the death of Amy Winehouse has left them further depleted. This winnowing of the natural environment is tragic enough without you wishing even greater homelessness on our avian friends. Had she brushed her hair, or engaged the services of one of these ethics deprived “stylists” as you so shockingly suggest, no doubt whole generations of birds would have had to fly tirelessly in circles, searching futilely for a nest that would never come, before finally falling to the ground spent and becoming an easy meal for some shiftless cat with bad teeth and a cockney accent. Shame. Shame on you.