// you’re reading...

Solo Signs Off

Other people’s children

Most people only care about their own children, so why do celebrities make enough money for life by selling pics of their sprogs?

Let’s face it, when it comes to other people’s children, nobody is interested. Whether you’re single, married, divorced or widowed, the only little ones folk are ever likely to be concerned about are their own. Mothers and fathers care passionately about their precious brood, while the childless among us are left faux-admiring them. It’s just the way the world is – no one really minds as we all know our role and that is that.
Which brings us to the subject of celebrity children. Brangelina’s recent record breaking scoop for the first pics of their newborn twins just makes you wonder one thing – why? Why did People and Hello magazines pay the superstars a reported $14 million for the debut snapshots of these tots? Clearly because they knew they would cause an international sensation and ordinary punters would run out to buy copies of the exclusive issue. Not to mention how much revenue they would generate in advertising. But still, it begs the question – do people seriously want to see photographs of Vivienne and Knox who, lets face it, are barely out of the womb and not likely to look drastically different to any of their peers – no matter how good their genes are? But, perhaps not. Perhaps people are more interested in looking at the twins’ parents, relaxing at home with their spanking new family? If you think about it, it makes sense. The majority of readers leafing through People and Hello are probably spending more time sizing up Brangelina than gazing admiringly at the babas. More to the point – the female readers are drooling over Brad while simultaneously checking out Ange’s post-pregnancy weight, while the male readers, on the other hand, are also drooling over Brad, albeit in a jealous way, as they gaze longingly at Ange’s post-pregnancy boobs. So, there you have it, everyone is happy. And there’s a strong chance nobody is paying the blindest bit of attention to Viv and Knox. Ditto with J-Lo and Marc Anthony’s twins, who also graced the cover of People, earning an apparent mere $6 million. (Meanwhile, what’s with the spate of Hollywood twins? Lisa Marie Presley is up next!). But did anyone even give a toss whether Max and Emme took after mom or dad? Nope. You can be sure male and female fans alike were more hoping for a gawk at J-Lo’s famous derrière.
So while we’re all for looking at snaps of papped celebs – especially when they’re looking their worst – we’re kind of of the opinion at this stage that the high-priced photos of their kids should be outlawed. No one cares. The only celebrity child who ever proved she was worth the wait was Suri Cruise – and that’s ’cause we didn’t see her ’til she was four or so months old and by then we were all convinced she didn’t exist. And when she did turn up on the cover of Vanity Fair she looked a bit Chinese or something. Yes, Suri was definitely a point of interest. Oh and Damien Hurley is quite a curiosity too for the simple reason that he is shockingly like his father and his mother puts clothes on him that are almost as outdated as her own. Meanwhile, Sunday Kidman Urban – or whatever they’re calling her – is another non-entity in the baby stakes, as she will also look exactly like any other newbie, yet Nicole is already pleading with the media to give them space to let them show her the sights of Sydney, Australia. Sigh.
But back to Brangelina. The latest ‘controversy’ is perhaps the most hilarious. People magazine has been forced to deny that it Photoshop-ed the smiling Vivienne on its famous cover of the happy family.
“Contrary to blog speculation, People did not Photoshop Vivienne Marcheline Jolie-Pitt’s smile. One can only guess that she is smiling because her parents are Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt,” said the mag’s director of PR, who was responding to rumours that Viv appeared to have been digitally helped to smile/laugh in the topical picture. New York magazine had, you see, cited an article from Parenting magazine, which said that babies don’t smile from exterior stimulation until two to four months of age. As Solo Sign Off is all about babies this month, we have one thing left to say – jeez, has nobody heard of bleedin’ wind?


Comments are disallowed for this post.

Comments are closed.